Home › Criticism › Social Constructionism

Social constructionism: essentialism in disguise

Contemporary gender activism presents itself as constructivist to undermine biological sex, but subsequently smuggles in an unchangeable inner essence: 'I have always been a woman'. That is an ideological belief in essentialism disguised as constructivism. Puberty blockers, mastectomies on healthy girls, and the wiping out of the category of woman rest upon this incoherence.

What constructivism says

Social constructionism holds that categories such as race, class and gender role are historically and culturally formed, not innate. In The Social Construction of What? (1999), Ian Hacking distinguished interactive categories (people change by reacting to them) from indifferent ones (a quark does not change because of its name). A role is constructed; a gamete is not. Confusing these two levels lies at the root of today's gender dogma.

The legitimate insights

Second-wave feminism has rightly shown that gender roles—housewife, weak sex, exclusion from public office—are historically imposed. Male and female role expectations vary cross-culturally. These are solid sociological findings, not a carte blanche for wiping away biological sex. See also sex versus gender .

The smuggling: essentialism in disguise

Contemporary activism invokes anti-essentialism to subordinate biological sex, while at the same time demanding an innate, unchangeable inner gender identity. "I have always been a woman, even as a toddler" is a purely essentialist claim, that of a secular soul. See essentialism versus constructionism and metaphysical claim.

Three boundaries that activism ignores

1. Constructed ≠ changeable by self-declaration. Money is constructed; no one becomes rich by declaring themselves rich. 2. Not everything in gender is cultural; biology plays a part (Baron-Cohen, Trivers). 3. The sex/gender distinction presupposes that sex is precisely not constructed; otherwise the whole theory collapses. In Material Girls (2021), Kathleen Stock criticises the theory that everyone has an inner gender identity that should weigh more heavily in society than biological sex, and distinguishes four meanings of the word "gender" (source).

The result: an unfalsifiable doctrine

A theory that switches between constructionism and essentialism depending on the situation can never be refuted. Whoever raises sex realism is told: sex is socially assigned. Whoever argues for fluidity of identity hears: being trans is innate. That is not science but dogma — see unfalsifiable and circular reasoning. Helen Joyce (Trans, 2021) argues that lobbying by trans activists allowed gender identity to replace biological sex in policy (source).

The damage

This doctrine underlies puberty blockers in children and legal self-identification, with consequences for law, sport, shelters and prisons. In the foreword to her final report, Hilary Cass writes that there are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views (source). Kathleen Stock announced on 28 October 2021 that she was leaving the University of Sussex, after a controversy over her views on trans rights (source). The Cass Review (2024) calls care for young people with gender dysphoria "an area of remarkably weak evidence" (source). See also detransition research.

Frequently Asked Questions