[AGTRT-BF13] Who is bullying whom? Discussion between De Sutter and Sunak on transgender is clouded by unclear definitions

Jan Bergstra & Laurens Buijs
Amsterdam Gender Theory Research Team

Belgian Deputy Prime Minister De Sutter and British Prime Minister Sunak accuse each other of bullying in a discussion about transgender people. This is evident from the following quote from The Guardian on Oct. 6:

“Belgium’s deputy prime minister, who ranks as one of Europe’s most senior transgender politicians, has urged Rishi Sunak not to join “the real bullies” after remarks made by the British prime minister at the Conservative party conference this week.

Sunak told the audience, “We shouldn’t get bullied into believing that people can be any sex they want to be,” to cheers and loud applause. “They can’t. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. That’s just common sense.”

These kinds of accusations back and forth are typical of the current polarization in discussions about (trans)gender. It is understandable that De Sutter (herself a transwoman) wants to respond to Sunak’s provocation, but she would have been better off doing so more precisely on substance.

Indeed, there is quite a bit to be said about the following statement, “We shouldn’t get bullied into believing that people can be any sex they want to be.” This claim (that people can be the sex they want to be) is not made by anyone, as far as we know. Rather, from transactivism, one makes the claim that people can be the gender they want. That claim, by the way, is also problematic.

It would improve clarity if Petra de Sutter would say, YES, “people can be the sex they want to be,” even if we ourselves would find that position incomprehensible. But even when she says, YES, “people can be the gender they want to be” is at least informative.

Read about Petra de Sutter’s previous comments on transgender people in chess:
Belgian Deputy Prime Minister Petra de Sutter unconvincing about transgender people in chess

We see this second claim as a distinctly co-essentialist position (we see co-essentialism as the thesis that gender is not determined at all by biological factors, that is, that determination of gender is fundamentally a human decision-making process). We do not endorse this, but it would help the discussion if both sides expressed themselves more clearly.

It will help against polarization if the debate on sex and gender is more precise. Are they talking about sex or gender, and in either case, what claim exactly are they making and how do they justify that claim?


Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *