As lawyers, we are noted for our logical acumen. Employing logic when making professional arguments or crafting our work is our baseline. So, I was more than dismayed to read in your publication an article titled: “Beyond the Binary: Practical Advice for Using Gender Pronouns” (Bench & Bar of Minnesota, Feb. 2019).
The authors start provocatively saying “misgendering a person … is an act of gender violence.” Ok. A bit of hyperbole but let’s see where it leads. Then they say, “sex is as a label” of “interpretation” “of a person’s anatomy at birth.” Hmmm. I would say that for about 99% of the population their sexual anatomy defines their sex. No interpretation needed. So, one would think that choosing you own “gender” would also be an act of “interpreting.” Right? Wrong. Transgenders possess “knowledge” of their gender according to the article: “Everyone has a gender identify, which is an internal knowledge of your own gender, this is how you know you are a man, woman or different gender.” So, viewing physical anatomy at birth is not “knowledge” but one, who on a given day decides their own gender based on nothing other than hunches, exercises “knowledge”? That’s bit of a stretch.
Regardless, even accepting the premise that “gender identity” is a product of “knowledge” and that referring to another’s gender wrongly produces “gender violence”, how does one correctly ID gender when there are at least 56 gender types (the authors only identify 4 in his/her/they/ze article)? Do we ask the person when first meeting them like the authors suggest? “Hi, I don’t know you & we’ve never spoken before but before I ask where you hang your shingle or what your practice area is, can you please tell me what your gender is so that I don’t commit ‘gender violence’ on you?” This is an absurd and impractical approach given that statistically the number of ‘other’ genders aside from “him” or “her” stands at less than 1% of the population.
But once again, even if we do initiate that introduction by asking ‘what is the correct gender pronoun for you’, by the authors’ own admission, many ‘other’ gender types don’t know or won’t tell. “It is imperative to note that transgender people should never be required to disclose information about their gender identity,” say the authors. Huh? So, how do we avoid committing ‘gender violence’ then?
Lastly, the elephant in the room under the authors’ premise is how to handle, to name a few, “gender nonconforming”, “gender variant” “gender questioning”, “gender fluid”, “neither” or “neutrois” genders? These gender types are not fixed and thus are not capable of identification. The authors suggest treating them like an object, without reference to a pronoun. How dehumanizing.
The authors succeed in providing advice, but it’s certainly not practical. There is simply too much liberty taken producing ‘logic violence’.
Joseph A. Field
Field Law, PA
Anoka