Reading Between the Binaries: A Beginning Introduction

To discuss gender abolition first requires an exploration in terminology. Arguments over the words “sex” and “gender” have been on the rise in recent years in conjunction with attacks on queer and transgender bodies through both personal and policy means. Discussing these ideas using Queer Theory provides a base of understanding for students to process materials on identity construction. Traditionally, sex has been defined as a naturally occurring binary determined by your biology and genital appearance. Gender is an expression of your identity formed through society, a socially constructed category of expectations placed on people because of their perceived sex. The two parallel each other, but may still be seen as falling into different categories–biology and sociology, respectively.

Colonial systems have long imposed and continue to enforce rigid binaries around sex and gender, originally emerging from Europe and North America as a means of control over Indigenous populations (Lugones 3). While it may be difficult to imagine, prior to colonial control, many cultures had developed roles and terms describing gender identities beyond the binary, with “Two-spirit” being one of the most commonly known. As the British empire swept the globe, enforcing the gender binary alongside other methods of erasure allowed Europeans to both culturally and economically control and exploit a significant portion of Indigenous life. Today, these ideas live on in the weaponization of falsely presented biology and some interpretations of Christian ideals that assert there are universal and intrinsic qualities between men and women and that these categories are fixed and impermeable. These harmful arguments connecting sex and gender, known as gender essentialism, continue to permeate radical feminist spaces and even within lesbian, gay, and bisexual communities, fragmenting solidarity between similarly oppressed groups.

Prominent gender theorists such as Judith Butler raise issues with this traditional structuring, relabeling it as a harmful and even scientifically false dichotomy. They argue that our categorization of sex itself is far more complicated than a binary can capture, citing the presence of intersex individuals and multiple species that can easily morph from one end of our gender system to the other. In addition, these biological categories are shaped by our language system and are not fully distinguishable from the culturally-shaped category of gender, especially when considering how our “scientific” textbooks have been filtered through a Western, colonial framework. For example, on the topic of sex as a concrete science, Judith Butler posited in one of their most popular books, Gender Trouble, that the body and markers of sex are intentionally shaped by political forces to achieve “strategic interests” (Butler, NATC 2378). This means that rather than being an objective description of biology, it is shaped in a way to maintain the current socio-political hierarchy. Building on theorists who analyze power, such as Michel Foucault, they propose that these epistemes (or ways of knowing) simply give the effect of being natural and “inevitable” by the manner it is imposed upon the body, creating a binary built on false “truths” (Butler, NATC 2376). The belief that these gendered categories and their accompanying social effects are simply a natural occurrence creates the illusion that the existing hierarchies between sexes is inevitable, rather than a societal choice resulting from a colonial framework.

These terms fall into Butler’s concept of the “Heterosexual Matrix,” a framework that shows how sex, gender, and desires are defined by false binaries. Common assumptions of the heterosexual matrix include the idea that there are only two genders, that your gender is determined by the sex you were assigned at birth, and that an individual should only be attracted to the ‘opposite’ sex. These ideas limit expression through both social and cultural norms, as well as permeating government offices, healthcare centers, and science labs. Butler writes on this in Gender Trouble, noting “the rites of passage that govern various bodily orifices presuppose a heterosexual construction of gendered exchange, positions, and erotic possibilities” (Butler, NATC 2381). In other words, most people know who they are and what their body means only through the lens of heterosexual relations, which inherently rely on the gender binary. Gender abolition not only opens up opportunities for dialogue on these concepts from queer theory, but also encourages material actions and commitments that can be carried into our daily lives or advocated through policy change.

What Is Gender Abolition?

Gender abolition may seem like a radical or pessimistic theory at first glance, but at its core, this theory attempts to pragmatically address the hierarchies and limits put in place by the dominant gender system while prioritizing freedom of expression. This is not a new idea, with similar sentiments circulating in the academic community for decades under different names; gender accelerationism, postgenderism, gender nihilism, and more. Regardless of the terminology used, all of these theories have attempted to name or solve the increasingly obvious issue of the imposed gender binary. Gender abolition attempts to address this through a living ideology, combining beliefs and practices that aim to deconstruct the restrictive roles and hierarchies enforced by the dominant gender system. In this way, gender abolition is both a theory to be studied and a strategy to be implemented.

Gender abolition builds on the work towards gender equality that has spanned hundreds–even thousands–of years, asserting that the only way to truly achieve this goal is through dismantling the system of gender as it is currently constituted. To reference the well-known quote from Audre Lorde, a Black lesbian feminist, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never bring about genuine change,” (Lorde 2). While the quote finds its origins in a speech addressing mostly straight, white, college-educated feminists, it illustrates a continued pattern of the failures of reformism, particularly in addressing gendered issues. Gender abolitionists recognize it is not enough to simply try to make the current system work. Rather, it is a call to action to reexamine, reimagine, and rebuild a new way of thinking and living.

What gender abolition does not call for is a sexless, androgynous society or for individuals to adhere to a specific label or presentation. Rather, gender abolition–and the workshop detailed later–promotes embracing and experimenting with identity and expression in a non-restrictive manner. Gender abolition envisions a world free of gender roles, assumptions, and laws dictating what one may do with their body, where everyone would be free to engage in their most authentic self and explore these avenues without fear of judgment or even violence. It is not expression itself that gender abolition takes an issue with, but rather the hierarchical framework gender itself operates from and its role in homogenizing cultures, the restrictive roles it enforces, and the ongoing violence against those who do not conform.

Gender abolition often aligns with common Marxist and class-based critiques, with many scholars positing that capitalism has kept the gender binary alive and well for the same reason it has class: to divide and oppress. Gender abolitionists see gender as just one part of a much larger, interconnected web of oppression that requires well-thought out, systemic approaches and individual reflections. Alyson Escalante, the author of “Gender Nihilism”, believes what follows these conversations is “a materialist struggle against patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism which understands and is attentive to the complex interrelations between these structures [and] theoretical development which demands not just abolition but a way to actually achieve it, and a clear set of materialist theoretical principles and praxis to unite around.” (Escalante 34). Escalante points to the fact that since gender doesn’t exist in a vacuum, gender abolition inherently takes an intersectional approach to the role of economic exploitation, racial hierarchies, and more systems of inequality that have contributed to our conceptions of gender. The fight for gender abolition is a fight against white supremacy, patriarchy, and capitalism–and vice versa.

While theories of gender and gender abolition itself may first seem to be predominantly abstract concepts, Lorde, a socialist herself, reminds us that “[i]n a world of possibility for us all, our personal visions help lay the groundwork for political action” (Lorde 2). Considering the ways that the dominant gender system impacts us all and shapes the image we have of ourselves is not simply a theoretical exercise, but rather an essential catalyst for determining the next steps towards equality and liberation. By engaging in education and reflection on an interpersonal level alongside both individual and large-scale actions, gender abolition aims to build a new world where any form of systemic oppression is absent from our lives.

As previously mentioned, gender abolition attempts to bridge the often difficult gap between theory and praxis, in part by encouraging both individual and collective action. The following list shows examples of ways to move gender abolition from an abstract ideal into a living, dynamic practice for individuals and communities.

Personal Actions:

• Challenging and deconstructing gendered expectations we have about ourselves and those around us
• Understanding identities and labels are flexible and multifaceted
• Work towards a better future for all. Read more political education materials, attend community events, and engage in mutual aid projects.

Policy Actions:

• Creating gender-neutral restrooms and other public facilities
• Eliminating gender markers on IDs, passports, etc…
• Protecting self-determination and bodily autonomy through marriage equality, reproductive rights, and opposing non-consensual surgical interventions on intersex individuals.

Gender abolition is a vital concept to consider in the classroom and beyond as harassment, physical violence, educational control, and other forms of systemic harm against queer populations and reproductive rights have increased. Legislation in Utah, the state in which I write this overview, has facilitated the closing of not only the LGBTQ+ Student Center, but also other spaces and programs aimed to create a more accessible educational setting (e.g., Black cultural centers). Educating and engaging participants on liberatory and imaginative topics such as gender abolition can provide a safe space for students, better inform future generations, and display perseverance and hope in the face of oppressive systems.