Sometimes, the most important questions are the basic ones. Back in 2011, I argued that the most important question in the gay-marriage debate was “What is marriage?” The next year, Robert George, Ryan Anderson, and Sherif Girgis published a book exploring just that question: What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense. But in the face of contemporary questions of transgenderism and gender identity, it turns out that we need to ask a yet more-basic question: what are men and women, and what makes them different?

To some of you, that question might seem obvious, even asinine. Nearly all of us have a working understanding of what we mean by “men” and “women.” Ironically, even people who believe that it’s possible to be transgender still affirm this: calling a man a “trans-woman” presupposes that we know what a woman is. In other words, what does it mean to say that a biological male is a woman?

I. Bad Answers to the Men and Women Question

Bear in mind, we’re looking for what it is that makes all men unlike all women. So here are some incorrect answers to the question:

1. Using stereotypes to distinguish men from women: women may tend to be more nurturing and men more abstract-thinking, etc., but there are so many counter-examples to any stereotype that you can come up with that this is obviously not a workable answer.
2. Using social norms to distinguish men from women: things like “women wear dresses, and men wear pants” are both stereotypes (suffering the same flaw as #1) and culturally-contingent: think Scottish kilts or female dress slacks as obvious counter-examples.
3. Using hormones to distinguish men from women: men typically have higher levels of testosterone and lower levels of estrogen, than women do. But testosterone and estrogen levels vary from individual to individual, and change throughout your life.
4. Using sexual organs to distinguish men from women: This is an obvious difference, but it’s not a satisfying answer. A castrated man isn’t less of a man, after all, nor is a woman any less a woman if she’s had a hysterectomy or mastectomy. Plus, a small portion of the human family is born “intersex” (a poor term) with ambiguous genitalia.
5. Denying that such a difference exists: Obviously, the fact that we can speak coherently of men and women means that we’re somehow distinct.

Nevertheless, while all of these answers miss the mark, all of them also have an element of the truth, which makes them attractive. So what would a better answer look like?

II. A Better Answer

Here’s what I think a better answer might look like:

1. The essential distinction between men and women is genetic. All men have a Y chromosome (typically XY, although in some cases XXY or XYY), and no women have Y chromosomes. In other words, men are adult male humans and women are adult female humans.
2. This genetic difference tends to express itself in different sexual organs. In rare cases, something impedes this from happening as it is ought to, or something happens to the sexual organs. But even in the case of those borned “intersexed,” there is a genetic sex: it just may be harder to tell.
3. This genetic difference also tends to express itself in different brain chemistry, different levels of various hormones, and differences (big and small) in cognitive and behavioral development.
4. Society also plays a role, and environmental factors can even impact hormone levels. It is not always easy to determine which social behaviors are attributable to social roles, or environment, or innate genetics. But most societies amplify the differences between the sexes by creating a set of gender roles.

The chief benefits of this definition of men and women are threefold.

First, this is what we have always meant by men and women, even before we knew what genes were. There was a recognition that there were real differences between male and female humans, present from birth, and we expressed these different types of humans with the terms ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ for children and ‘men’ and ‘women’ for adults (and ‘male’ and ‘female’ on the whole). Genes explain why these differences exist (and why unusual things sometimes happen in how the genes express themselves). Second, this is how we speak about non-humans. We can coherently speak of male and female mammals using a similar genetic distinction. Finally, this definition avoids two obviously-false extremes: the idea that men and women are interchangeable, and a sort of “Rambo and Barbie” reductionism.

III. The Implications for the Transgender / Gender Identity Question

The points above are much bigger than contemporary debates over gender identity and transgender issues. A lot of the ink spilled over the last few decades on issues like feminism could be aided by everyone having a clearer understanding of women and men and the differences between them (and especially, of which of those differences are innate and universal, and which of those are socially constructed, etc.). But while it’s not reducible to that question, I think it’s helpful.

We can both affirm that there really are fundamental genetic differences between men and women, and affirm that (for example) some women act and emote in conventionally-masculine ways, and may even have higher-than-average testosterone levels, etc. So it’s no surprise that there are people who don’t “fit” the social expectations for what a man or what a woman is like. That, of itself, is nothing new – terms like “tomboy” exist to describe this reality. And our response ought to be one of compassion and support, particularly if we’re Christians.

But having a coherent definition of “man” and “woman” does show why transgenderism is a non-starter. What I mean is this. If the claim were just “I’m a man who likes feminine things,” that would be a coherent idea. But if a biological male claims to be a woman, what does that person mean by “woman”? They can’t mean that a biological male is biologically female, because that doesn’t make sense. And if their understanding of what it is to be a “woman” is rooted in any of the types of definitions we explored in Part I, you can see why those don’t work.

So there’s something a bit deceptive in all of this. A person who believes in transgenderism cannot say that men and women are the same thing (since there would be nothing to “trans” if the two genders are the same). But they also cannot affirm that men and women are essentially different, since affirming that fact would make their own claim nonsense. So “transgenderism” relies on the language of “man” and “woman,” and even relies on the idea that the two are somehow different, while emptying those words of any actual meaning and refusing to define what this new meaning of “man” and “woman” actually is.

In light of the Vanity Fair cover story about Bruce Jenner’s decision to undergo a "gender transition" and current desire to be called Caitlyn Jenner, I thought it would be appropriate to look at five important questions those who support gender-transitioning need to answer.

1. What determines reality: facts or feelings?

My wife used to work at a psychiatric hospital where it was standard procedure to not feed into a patient’s delusions. If a patient, for example, said he was a cat, that would not justify leaving a bowl of milk for him in his room. However, if a patient with a male genetic code and male genitalia said he was a woman, then the staff had to treat him as a woman and refer to him with female pronouns.

But what’s the difference between someone redefining his species and redefining his sex? After all, both of these things are determined anatomically and genetically. Or consider this non-hypothetical example: what if a person thinks she is disabled but is actually healthy? Should we treat her mistaken sense of identity, or should we disable her so her body conforms to her mistaken self-identity?

Well, just as transgender people make a distinction between the sex they were purportedly assigned at birth and the sex they now identify with (i.e., their gender), the “transabled” make a distinction between the disabilities society says they don't have and the disabilities they think they have.

The woman pictured below is named Chloe Jennings-White, and she is “transable.” This means that, although her legs function properly, she still uses leg braces and a wheelchair, because she identifies as “disabled.” Living as an able-bodied person is as painful for her as it is for a transgender person to live in accordance with his biological sex. Some "transabled" people even ask doctors to help them become disabled (such as by having their spinal cords severed).

But how is allowing a person to identify as transable any different from allowing him to identify as transgender? In fact, one researcher in Canada (who happens to be transgender but not transable) says the transgender community hasn’t supported the transabled community because the former doesn’t want its recent momentum in the court of public opinion to grind to a halt by being associated with what most people recognize to be a serious pathology.

Indeed, if we are disgusted that a doctor would amputate the healthy limbs of a transable person, then why aren’t we equally disgusted by a doctor who would amputate the healthy genitals of a transgender person?

2. What do the terms man and woman mean?

If I were to say that a woman is someone who wears high heels and makeup, and has long, flowing hair and a curvy figure, many people would accuse me of sexism. They would say I’m reducing what it means to be a woman to some superficial traits that aren’t representative of all women. After all, some women have short hair, and others can’t stand the aches and pains associated with high heels.

And yet, isn’t that what Jenner’s transformation into a woman is endorsing—the idea that a woman is a svelte and sultry individual who looks good (to some people) in a corset on a magazine cover? In fact, this is one reason that some feminists actually oppose gender reassignment and transgender identities.

So here’s my question to transgender advocates: “What do the terms man and woman actually mean?”

What is the difference between a gender-non-conforming man (a biological male who enjoys looking and acting like a woman but wants to be called a man) and a transgender woman (a biological male who enjoys looking and acting like a woman and wants to be called a woman)?

If the only difference is the terms themselves, then modern “gender ideology” is guilty of eviscerating the concepts of male and female of any objective meaning beyond “what I want to be called.” How can we ever hope to raise well-adjusted men and women who interact with one another in a healthy way (and so form the foundation of civilization) when no one has any idea what men and women are in the first place?

3. Is it hateful to be attracted to one sex but not to transgendered people who identify as that sex?

Many people in the transgender community complain about not being considered “real" men or “real" women. They want to end the distinction between one who is male or female by birth and one who is male or female by choice. In fact, one pro-transgender website says that the idea that transgender people are not “real men and women” is

probably the most hurtful myth of all. It tells us that transgender people are somehow less human because of their gender identification. It is proof that they do not have a place in proper society. It is hateful and unacceptable. Everyone should have the right to be men and women, regardless of sex category or anything else.

This often happens in the realm of dating and interaction with the non-transgendered. For example, a transgender man (i.e., a biological woman who dresses like a man or has undergone surgery to try to resemble a man) may not be attractive to biological women, since they usually desire biological men, not transgender men. He may become indignant when women say, "I only date actual men" or "real men."

Many states already have laws that outlaw discrimination based on “gender identity,” which means that it is illegal for an employer to make distinctions between biological men/women and transgender men/women. Granted, the law has no authority to coerce private citizens to not make those same distinctions. However, the law can legitimize the culture's ostracizing of those who believe there is a difference between biological sex and self-proclaimed gender.

Society may, for example, consider a woman who dates biological men exclusively rather than transgender men (or men who do the same with biological and transgender women) to be as bigoted as someone who refuses to date immigrants because he or she prefers “natural Americans.” Will it become, in the words of the above critic, "hateful and unacceptable" to decline a romantic gesture from a transgendered person because that person is not an "actual" man or a "real" woman that one would normally be attracted to?

4. Will parents be guilty of child abuse if they fail to “transition” their children who identify as transgender?

In the past few years, there have been several high-profile cases of parents who helped their children undergo sex-change reassignment surgery in order to accommodate their identification of being transgendered. One famous case in 2011 involved Thomas Lobel, an 11-year-old boy who identifies as a girl named Tammy. His adoptive lesbian parents claim that Thomas (pictured below between them) has said he was a girl ever since he was three years old, and they worried about suicide risks if they didn’t help him use hormone blockers to stave off puberty.

But what about the mental health risks involved in trying to change a child’s sex? According to John Hopkins University professor Paul McHugh, “When children who reported transgender feelings were tracked without medical or surgical treatment at both Vanderbilt University and London's Portman Clinic, 70 to 80 percent of them spontaneously lost those feelings.” Imagine how devastating it would be for a little boy or girl to have his body permanently mutilated just because he or she expressed a fleeting, childish thought.

The other disturbing scenario we have to confront is this: Confronted with the claim that children with gender identity disorder are at greater risk for suicide and the assumption that a sex-change operation is the only way to prevent such a horrible outcome, will parents be convicted of child abuse if they don’t consent to a child’s sex-change therapy or operation? Imagine a child tells his teacher or counselor, even at the age of four or five, “I’m not a boy, I’m a girl; but Mommy says that’s not true.” Could this result in the child being taken from his parents' custody for his own safety? In a culture that celebrates being transgendered, it’s not hard to see this coming to pass.

5. Will a culture that celebrates transgender identities tolerate evidence that such identities are harmful?

According to McHugh:

A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.

When presented with evidence like this, supporters of sex-change therapy usually say that negative health outcomes arise from “social stigmas” or “lack of resources for the transgendered.” But this is a classic example of “heads I win, tails you lose.”

If a transgender person reports having no negative health outcomes, then transgender therapies and surgery are vindicated. But, if a transgender person regrets his decision to change genders or reports having high levels of stress or other disorders, then that’s not because being transgender is harmful. Instead, it’s because society oppresses the transgendered, and that causes their negative mental health outcomes. Of course, this is a convenient way to frame the issue so that one's position can’t be disproved.

We may even come to the point where testimonies of those who underwent sex-change operations and regretted their decision, such as the one shared on the Catholic Answers Focus podcast, will be seen as another cause of stigma and thus be declared anathema in the public square.

Conclusion

The bottom line is this: we should not mock or dehumanize people who have gender identity disorder. Someone struggling with this disorder requires counseling, appropriate medical intervention, and an empathetic ear that is willing to listen. But we also shouldn’t celebrate the mutilation of healthy bodies or facilitate the destruction of masculinity and femininity.

We should treat identity disorders equally and not refuse to call something a disorder just because many people disagree with that assessment (truth isn't determined by majority vote, after all). Instead, we must compassionately help the person who has an identity disorder, regardless of his or her age or stage of life, come to know his or her true self and flourish as the person he or she was created to be.
 
 
(Image credit: CNN)