HHS Secretary Issues New Guidance on Gender Recognition
male and female. This guidance marks a significant shift in the government's approach to gender identity, moving away from the recognition of a third gender or non-binary identities.
The guidance emphasizes the biological basis of sex, stating that it is "unchangeable and determined by objective biology." It further clarifies that interventions such as hormone therapy or surgery do not alter a person's sex, as they do not change the type of gamete (egg or sperm) their reproductive system is designed to produce.
The guidance also addresses the issue of disorders of sexual development, stating that these conditions do not constitute a third sex because they do not result in the production of a third gamete.
The document concludes with straightforward definitions for the terms "woman," "girl," "man," "boy," "mother," and "father," based solely on biological sex.
This new guidance is likely to be met with mixed reactions. Some will welcome the clarity and simplicity it provides, while others may view it as a step backward in terms of inclusivity and recognition of diverse gender identities.
15 Comments
Eugene Alta
“The focus on biology over identity feels incredibly dismissive of trans folks and their struggles.”
KittyKat
“Using biology as a basis for gender isn’t about exclusion—it’s about having a standard rooted in scientific facts.”
BuggaBoom
“This decision is anti-progress. We should be celebrating diversity, not enforcing rigid gender norms.”
Katchuka
“I’m really worried this guidance will marginalize and harm the mental health of non-binary and transgender communities.”
BuggaBoom
“By dismissing the realities of intersex and transgender individuals, this policy is regressive and harmful.”
Muchacho
“I appreciate a policy that is honest about the biological aspects of sex. It’s time we respected objective reality.”
Mariposa
“Clear guidelines help ensure that the rights and responsibilities associated with gender are defined consistently.”
Muchacho
“Relying solely on gamete production to define sex oversimplifies human biology and disrespects people’s lived realities.”
Coccinella
“Using objective biology to police gender shows a lack of empathy toward transgender and intersex individuals.”
Mariposa
“Focusing on objective science is important. This guidance brings a sense of consistency to what defines gender.”
Muchacha
“This new guidance completely ignores the diversity of gender! It’s disheartening to see biology used to erase non-binary identities.”
Bella Ciao
“So much for inclusion. Narrowing gender to just male and female invalidates the experiences of so many people.”
Comandante
“I support this guidance because it recognizes the unchanging nature of biological sex, which is essential for many administrative processes.”
Mariposa
“It feels like a step backward for progress. Why can’t we recognize that gender is more complex than just what biology says?”
Africa
“Interesting how the government chooses simplistic definitions when human experience is far richer and more complex.”