Home › Criticism › Essentialism versus constructionism

Essentialism versus constructionism: incoherent dogma

The doctrine of gender identity demands simultaneously that gender be constructed (to transcend biological sex) and essential (to be innate and inviolable). Neither is possible — yet medical interventions, legal self-id, and the erasure of the category of woman rest upon this incoherence.

Two incompatible positions

Essentialism posits that there are fixed, intrinsic characteristics that make individuals members of a category. Constructionism posits that categories are socio-historically formed and not discoveries of nature. Both have different empirical and political implications; they cannot both be true regarding the same property. See also social constructionism and natural species .

How activism needs both

To undermine biological sex, activism employs constructionist arguments: "sex is socially assigned," "sex is a spectrum." To legitimize its own claim, it resorts to essentialism: "I have always been a woman," "being trans is innate." The first position denies essences; the second requires one. See also performative act of speech .

Gender as belief in an unchangeable inner self = essentialism disguised

The contemporary "I have always been a woman, even as a toddler" is the purest essentialist position conceivable — an unchangeable inner essence that transcends the body. That is precisely what second-wave feminists fought against. The irony: gender activism presents itself as anti-essentialist but reproduces a deeper, untested essence — a secular soul. See metaphysical claim .

Sally Haslanger's solution and her prize

Sally Haslanger attempted to resolve the contradiction through "ameliorative analysis": gender as a social class position, not an inner essence. This position is only saved by abandoning gender identity-as-essence. In doing so, activism loses its metaphysical claim—and with it, the moral compulsion upon which legal self-id and medical interventions rest. No integration can endure without sacrificing one of these aspects.

The practical damage

Critics are met alternately with both registers. A biological argument? "Sex is social." A reference to gender role transition? "Identity is innate." In the foreword to the Cass Review (2024), Hilary Cass writes that few other areas of healthcare are as toxic: professionals are afraid to give their views openly (source). An incoherent theory is a weak basis for puberty blockers and other medical interventions in minors. Whether medical transition in minors improves mental health in the long term is uncertain: systematic reviews found no high-quality research showing that it does (Cass Review 2024; Ludvigsson et al. 2023). Some people also detransition.