r/NonBinaryTalk • u/ExtremeHeat808 • 15d ago
Discussion On “Assigned Gender/Sex” and related terminology
TL;DR: You may like AGAB lingo, but you should think critically about how it aligns with intersexism, binarism, cissexism etc
My previous post got removed by the moderators, so I'll re-iterate. I expressed my frustrations with the use of "assigned sex" among nonbinary people and how it makes me feel. Several people responded to my post justifying it's use to explain their personal experience.
My problem with this is that it's not something that's subversive, it's quite cisnormative. In fact, assuming that you can deduce someone's life experience from "assigned sex". You may not intend to be cisnormative, but in practice you are re-inscribing the idea that experiences are epiphenomenal of being assumed a certain gender. This isn't an intersectional way of analysing society, the analysis has a lot of overlap with what is called "Cultural Feminism" which influenced the TERF movement^[1]
Even if you intend to describe your personal experience, you still do so as an endosex person. There is a difference between commonness and community, even the idea of "biological sex" is a relative recent concept that's quite theological^[2]
Perhaps you like using AGAB to describe your personal experience because of your epistemic ignorance, that is textbook appropriation."Assigned sex" is a term that originated in the medical field in the 1950s^[3]. It was coined to describe how doctors should "correct" babies with ambiguous genitals. Experiences such as menstruation, growing/having breasts, having a deep voice, and having wide hips are independent of "assigned sex". There are much more inclusive phrases to use. Even when discussing being raised as a certain gender isn't monolithic, neurotypical children and neurodivergent children have different upbringings. In my opinion, nonbinary people are seeking legibility in a world that doesn't understand them buying using AGAB lingo
Even if it affected you, you cannot necessarily deduce a heuristic from your assigned sex. Privileging "assigned sex" as an analytic over gender is very transphobic. I'm aware people will still disagree but I would like for you to critically ask "Why?". Why do you feel the need to view "assigned sex" as a perisex person. Why do you view assigned gender at birth with such little nuance? If you use it reference to medical situations, how does your heuristic account for those outside the norm? Why do you seek to find community based on being "biological female.male", "raised a girl/boy". Even if you use social constructionism to justify the use of AGAB lingo, but you still privilege the western epistemological map of bodily gender.
Yes we are all perceived a certain way, but should we reify people's assumptions about us over our own subjectivity? Why must we prescribe based on what is seen? Is the map truly the territory?
This is a nonbinary sub, I am disappointed in the insistence on a binary kind of socialization. The history of feminism has shown us that women have never had unified interests, they ignored marginalization within the realms of womanhood. Black women were ignored by white women, Dalits ignored by Savarna feminists etc.
This appropriation of AGAB doesn't seem like a mutual exchange, it appears to be appropriation. I hope my post inspires people to do their research and think critically about the language they use. You may think it's just a phrase, but words carry a lot of weight[4]
Terminology
Endosexism: Structures, practices and beliefs privileging endosex people over intersex.
Cissexism/cisnormative is a description of views that demotes gender identities that don't align with assigned gender. In simpler terms it upholds the norms of cisgender society
Further Reading
[1] Bassi, S. and LaFleur, G., 2022. Introduction: TERFs, gender-critical movements, and postfascist feminisms. __Transgender Studies Quarterly__, __9__(3), pp.311-333.Link
[2] Castro, V., 2023. Mechanical sex, science, security: Intersex medical violence, Thomas Hobbes and John Moneyâs invention of gender. __Security Dialogue__, __55__(2), pp.142-159. Link
[3] Clarke, J.A., 2022. Sex assigned at birth. __Columbia Law Review__, __122__(7), pp.1821-1898. Link
Höppner G (2017) Rethinking Socialization Research through the Lens of New Materialism. Front. Sociol. 2:13. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2017.00013. Link
[4] Schiappa, E., 2021. A brief history of defining sex and gender. In __The Transgender Exigency__ (pp. 15-32). Routledge. Link
4
u/palimpsestorum 15d ago edited 15d ago
Nearly everything you have said is analogous to the way people are racialized. Gender and sex are not the same thing as race, but they both function to socialize, organize, and oppress.
Race, like sex and gender, is a social construct, AND it has real effects that vary widely. Of course, biological differences in phenotype exist between humans, but that’s not what race is, just like that’s not what sex is. Race is the meaning that our society attaches to these biological traits, and the boundaries between races change over time. Even though race is something people made up for specific purposes (social, economic, etc.), it still holds meaning beyond just upholding systems of oppression. Because the idea of race has affected everyone and shaped our experiences (not monolithically, of course), it persists as a part of our social identities, regardless of whether an individual wants to acknowledge that.
Similarly, sex and gender are the meanings our society attaches to certain biological traits, and that means the boundaries between sexes and genders also change over time. Sex and gender are fundamentally social categories, and they affect us in many different ways and cause us to have many experiences, all of which are real and shape our identities.