[AGTRT-BF20] What is gender anyway, and why is biological sex not sufficient?

Jan Bergstra & Laurens Buijs
Amsterdam Gender Theory Research Team

Version 2 of this blog appeared on April 9, 2024
Version 1 can be read back here

Structure of this blog

Introduction
The biological reality of male and female
Majority versus minorities: responsible exceptionalism
Transgender: an incongruent gender identity
Intersex: between male and female
Formal gender and the gender inclusion problem
Primary gender identity (PGI): male, female or neutral
Secondary gender identity (SGI): androgyny
Social gender
Conclusion: gender is here to stay

1. Introduction

It is unfortunate that the discussion of gender is so often flattened to the question of whether or not there are more than two genders. Gender is about more than that. Gender is about how we deal with the concepts of man and woman, in ourselves and in society. With gender, we do not deny biological sex, but merely acknowledge that it takes more to understand man and woman (and male and female) than biology.

In this blog, we will reflect on the different aspects of gender that we distinguish in formal gender theory(FGT): physical gender, legal gender, formal gender, psychological gender and social gender. We begin with a definition of these concepts, and they will then be discussed and clarified further in this blog.

Bodily gender: sex, gender, English: bodily gender, or simply sex (see also AGTRT-BF42).
Legal gender: the gender assigned to a person at the marital status.
Formal gender: short for gender, per convention the “default” meaning of gender (see also AGTRT-BF8).
Psychological gender: how a person feels as part of identity (see AGTRT-BF69), where the distinction between primary and secondary gender identity is important (see AGTRT-BF47).
Social gender: gender as reflected in social roles, behaviors, norms and relationships.

Read more about the difference between sex and gender:
The Dutch language is deficient for gender theory, and must be expanded to include male and female

But we start with the biological reality of male and female, and the question of why it is necessary to distinguish between gender and sex at all.

2. The biological reality of male and female

In humans, as in most mammals, the distinction between the two biological sexes is important. Almost all animals as well as many plants reproduce sexually. In all species that reproduce sexually, this is done by combining a large gamete (an egg cell) with a small gamete (a sperm cell). Gametes are produced by the gonads: sex glands such as testes and ovaries.

Although some hermaphroditic plants and animals produce both eggs and sperm, no mammalian species do. In mammals, each individual produces only one type of gamete. Those individuals that produce (relatively few) eggs are called female; those that produce (large numbers of) sperm are called male. Whether a mammalian species develops into a male or a female is determined by a pair of sex chromosomes: XX for females, XY for males.

So the difference between male and female is fundamental to the existence, even of human beings. Evolutionary biologists speak of sexual dimorphism: all kinds of evolutionary processes develop around physical differences between the sexes male and female. These differences go beyond reproductive organs to include secondary sex characteristics such as physique, facial features, and breast tissue development in women. This dimorphism is the result of evolutionary processes and has a variety of functions. Charles Darwin closely studied its biological and reproductive functions.

A central mechanism of evolutionary theory as already described by Darwin is sexual selection. This refers to the process by which certain characteristics of an organism evolve as they enhance that organism’s ability to reproduce successfully. These traits can develop even if they do not provide a direct survival advantage: sexual selection is about selection of traits that increase the attractiveness of the individual.

These include traits that increase attractiveness to the opposite sex (intersex selection), as well as traits that affect the mutual competition of individuals of the same sex (intrasexual selection). The idea is that these characteristics (such as colors, sounds, behaviors, etc.) are passed on to offspring, increasing the likelihood of reproduction and passing on the genetic traits.

Sexual selection plays an important role in the emergence and maintenance of sexual dimorphism. If certain traits of one sex are more attractive to the other sex, sexual selection may lead to the evolution of those traits, increasing their attractiveness. For example, males of some species develop larger antlers or colorful feathers to attract females during mating seasons. These sexually selected characteristics quickly lead to greater physical differentiation between the sexes, or sexual dimorphism.

3. Majority versus minorities: responsible exceptionalism

So the difference between male and female is important in nature, and also in humans. Yet it is going too far to argue that the difference between man and woman is only a binary and biological issue. Through the work of evolutionary biologist Joan Roughgarden and others, for example, we know that social interactions and relationships within species play a crucial role within evolution. She argues that traditional views of sexual selection place too much emphasis on competition and conflict in nature, and pay too little attention to cooperation and diversity within species.

Sexual selection, she says, is not only about acquiring mates and increasing reproductive success, but also about cooperation, communication and social interaction. Roughgarden’s focus on the social function of sexual selection provides a less binary and more fluid view of gender difference. Within social interactions, individuals can always play different roles, thus breaking away from strict gender divisions.

Indeed, if a collective can be flexible with the difference between men and women, it can also have all kinds of benefits for the community. Indeed, this leads to greater flexibility in the social structure of the community, and this also means greater adaptability to the environment and to the needs of the community. So while all sorts of biologically determined characteristics and behaviors of men and women have evolved from evolution, the ability to vary on them has also evolved with it.

In other words, it is an illusion to think that “nature” and “nurture” can be separated very precisely, as if they were totally independent of each other. The message is double when it comes to the difference between men and women. On the one hand, there is a clear binary biological difference between men and women that defines the majority of people in many ways. On the other hand, that is not the full story, and binary biology, by definition, is immediately accompanied by diversity that challenges that binarity (see also AGTRT-BA2). To talk about this complexity, it is useful to talk about gender in addition to sex.

Read more about the complexity of gender and sexuality in evolutionary biology:
Evolutionary theory has now made room for diversity of sexuality and gender

In today’s polarized discussion of gender, the different camps each often emphasize the different sides of this evolutionary coin. Essentialism tends to point to the biological harshness of the difference between men and women, while co-essentialism insists more on its social malleability (see Mission). At the AGTRT, we feel it is important to continue to emphasize both issues: paying attention to elasticity does not mean denying toughness, and vice versa.

Essentialism can insist with such conviction on the biological and fixed aspects of gender and sexuality that flexibility and diversity are quickly lost sight of. The difference between man and woman then quickly becomes a coercive and stereotypical dogma into which everything and everyone must be stuffed, denying its complexity. In the way, too often in the past, the LGBT group has been denied or dismissed as a “flaw of nature.” And all the while diversity of sexuality and gender is inseparable from evolution. It is precisely from these minorities that lessons can be learned about gender and sexuality that are relevant to everyone.

Co-essentialism tends to strike out in just the opposite direction. There the impression is quite often given that it would be “wrong” to think in terms of majorities and minorities in terms of gender and sexuality, because that would only reproduce repressive culture. The idea can thus arise that anyone who is not gender fluid or bisexual would be influenced by oppressive norms (see AGTRT-BF1 and AGTRT-BA8). But there is nothing at all wrong with noting that there are certain structures and majorities in gender and sexuality due to biology, as long as diversity and minorities are not thereby denied.

The difference between man and woman is simple in the basics, but complex in the details. It is obvious to the majority, but a complicated quest for minorities. Carefully studying the LGBT group without denying them on the one hand (as within essentialism), or elevating them to a norm or even ideal on the other (as within co-essentialism), is what we aim to do with the AGTRT, and what we call the principle of responsible exceptionalism.

Good research on the LGBT group yields much because they can be seen as the exceptions that confirm the rule. It is precisely by looking at where gender and sexuality run differently than usual that we gain insights relevant to the entire collective. It is precisely when we look closely at those last two letters of LGBT that it becomes clear why the concept of gender is relevant: not just to them, but to everyone.

4. Transgender: an incongruent gender identity

Every human being is assigned a gender at birth. In formal gender theory(FGT), we prefer to speak of physical gender rather than sex (see also AGTRT-BF41, AGTRT-BF42 and AGTRT-BF46). That term makes clear that there are different ways in which physical sex can be determined, and that historically there have been changes in what is seen as the best or most common way (see also AGTRT-BF54). So you can be a “physical man” in different ways:

Morphologically masculine: or what you can see “from the outside.”
Male in terms of chromosome composition,
Male in terms of gonads and gametes,
Male as seen on FMRI brain scans (a recent technique, see AGTRT-BF52),
Combinations of the options above.

Currently, it is common to determine physical gender by inspection of the genitals (morphology); in case of doubt, testing can also be done to determine which chromosomes (usually XX or XY) a person has. Based on a person’s physical gender, a gender is determined and registered in the population register. In FGT, this is called legal gender, and it can take three values: AMAB, AFAB or ANAB (these abbreviations stand for Assigned Male/Female/Neutral At Birth). Legal gender, then, is the gender assigned to someone at marital status.

Gender and its attribution is a simple matter with most people. First, they are biologically male or female. That means they have a male or female physical gender. Second, they are also legally registered as such: they have a male or female legal gender (in other words, they are AMAB or AFAB). There is a small group that can be assigned neutral gender: they are ANAB (more on that later).

For most people, their gender and its attribution is simply a fact: they were born male or female, and this is registered as such in the population register. As they grow up, they also feel male or female and develop a social and psychological identity around their physical and formal gender. There is then congruent gender identity: their physical, legal, psychological and social gender are “aligned.” This is also referred to as cisgender: these are individuals whose gender identity matches the sex assigned to them at birth.

There are also people with incongruent gender identity: they do not feel comfortable with their physical gender and the way it is legally recorded at the civil registry. Of people who have long-term and structural incongruent gender identities, we know that this can be associated with severe psychological suffering over time.

It is this psychological suffering that is referred to as gender dysphoria, which is defined in the DSM-V psychiatric manual as a “serious mental illness.” Here it is useful to distinguish between the incongruent gender identity itself, and the suffering that is a consequence of it; indeed, the latter can be seen as a mental illness, the former not necessarily.

Indeed, incongruent gender identity can have several causes. Although details about this are still unclear and, in a complex phenomenon such as this, there are often several mixed causes, we can distinguish at least two extremes. Incongruence may be caused by trauma (often sexual dysfunction); then treatment with psychotherapy is an option. But the incongruity can also be innate. Evidence is accumulating that its development may be influenced (in part) by genetic and hormonal factors, even as early as the early stages of embryonic development.

In the latter case, psychotherapy makes no sense, at least not to treat the incongruity, and thus it makes no sense to speak of a mental illness. These people do not have a psychological problem, but are simply “born in the wrong body.” Actually, only gender transition is then a possible treatment. It is not clear how large a group this is; an estimate by the SCP (2012) comes to 0.05% of the population.

When people with gender incongruence make such a transition, they become transgender. People used to speak of transsexuality and transsexuals, but those terms are becoming less common. This is due to the changing goals of the transgender movement, which has sought to shift the focus from the physical aspects, such as gender reassignment, to a person’s gender identity. They now prefer to name their gender identity themselves, rather than being defined in medical terms.

It is this ideal of self-identification that is so central to co-essentialism, and which in many ways is also problematic (see also AGTRT-BF76). There, the question of whether someone should be considered male or female is left entirely up to the person. Clearly, this definition of male and female has limitations, if only because professionals are needed to identify what causes the incongruity in gender identity, and what is the best treatment.

Read more about the limitations of self-identification:
Science still struggles with gender, self-identification isn’t everything

It makes sense that the trans movement also relates critically to the medical profession. It can be seen as progress that now, compared to several decades ago, gender transitions place less emphasis on complete (surgical) sex change. Changing the sex organs is painful and invasive, and not always with desired results. It is also good that more and more space has been created for the individual case, and for the wants and needs there.

In contemporary transitions, therefore, there is more and more room for partial transitions with less medicalization. For many transgender people, it is enough if they can convincingly present themselves to the world as the opposite sex. Much can already be accomplished with changes in clothing, makeup, hair, motor skills and voice through speech therapy. Medical treatments are increasingly limited to cosmetic surgery and hormone therapy.

Thus, while the fact that transgender people today attach less importance to gender reassignment surgery may be seen as progress, it is still unwise for the transgender phenomenon to cease to be defined in medical terms altogether. Transgender health care has been under considerable attack for several years because of problems with diagnosis and treatment, including among young people (see AGTRT-BED66), resulting in part from too much leeway for self-identification and physicians relinquishing too much control and placing too much responsibility on the patient. Moreover, it is clear that the listing of gender dysphoria in the DSM-V has also brought much to trans emancipation in terms of institutionalization, recognition and treatment (see also AGTRT-BA8).

In many ways, the trans movement seems to want to copy the route of gay emancipation, by focusing on de-pathologization and opposing medicalization. But there is a big difference: gender dysphoria is about the psychological suffering that is well intrinsic to an incongruent gender identity, which need not be intrinisic to a gay, lesbian or bisexual orientation. Moreover, gender transitions are now usually medical as well, even if “only” hormone treatments are chosen, while the process of “coming out” obviously does not have to be in any way.

The modern trans movement’s insistence on self-identification and de-medicalization may paradoxically lead to the undermining of traditional achievements and rights of transgender people in the long run, because it is precisely the medical and psychiatric sectors that are at the forefront of the trans movement and provide care that will continue to be necessary for this group in the future.

5. Intersex: between male and female

In addition to transgender individuals, there are also those born with an intersex condition. They also used to be called hermaphrodites, but this term is being used less and less because it does not do justice to the great complexity of intersex variations. People with an intersex condition have sexual characteristics of both sexes for a variety of reasons. There are a total of more than 30 different variations, arising from a variety of atypical developments in hormones or chromosomes.

The most common is Klinefelter syndrome: this affects people with XXY chromosomes and occurs in 0.1% of births. These individuals are anatomically male, but often infertile. Some extremely rare conditions, such as De la Chapelle syndrome (0.003%) and Swyer syndrome (0.0005%) can be seen as falling outside the standard male/female distinction (see also AGTRT-BA8).

People with intersex conditions often rely on medical support, but given the wide variation in intersex conditions, customization should always be sought there. For intersex persons, it is important to end medical interventions without their consent, without the strict necessity of those interventions. Indeed, traditionally, it has been customary to perform surgery immediately after birth, in case an intersex condition is diagnosed (incidentally, not all intersex conditions are visible immediately at birth).

The idea that doctors decide in consultation with parents for a newborn baby whether it should be a boy or a girl, i.e., without a say from the intersex person themselves, is now understandably under fire. It is important that there be more research into which interventions for which conditions are justified at birth, and which should be left to the intersex person themselves. Just what gender-affirming surgeries are necessary or desirable, and when, is still under debate. Regardless, many people with an intersex condition rely on lifelong medical care, such as hormone therapy.

6. Formal gender and the gender inclusion problem.

We have now become acquainted with transgender and intersex persons, who may have undergone all kinds of surgeries to become male or female, even if not (entirely) in line with their physical gender. This begs the question: are these people male or female? That depends entirely on how man and woman are defined.

Bodily gender, of course, cannot simply be changed unless it is defined only morphologically and a trans person has undergone a complete surgical sex change. But because the chromsomes cannot be changed, and which in modern society so determine how we make sense of bodily gender, it is obvious to argue that transgender people cannot change bodily gender, even after gender transition. Gender transition does change the body, morphologically and also hormonally, but according to the most common definition, therefore, not the full bodily gender.

However, transgender people can change legal gender, and psychological and social gender. Moreover, certain social conventions may emerge that do cause trans people to be seen and categorized as the preferred gender in certain contexts. Such a social convention about the definition of man and woman in a particular community, sector or other social context is what we formally call gender in FGT.

All of this together (hormomal treatments, some medical-surgical procedures, cosmetic adjustments, change of legal, psychological and social gender, and social acceptance in the form of a trans inclusive definition of formal gender) is also more than enough for many trans people to stop the psychological suffering associated with having an incongruent gender identity. First and foremost, it is important for them to be validated and accepted as much as possible as someone of the desired gender, even if they are not strictly physical.

Currently, there are all sorts of discussions about how far acceptance of trans people should go. For example, should trans women be allowed in women’s prisons, on women’s toilets and in women’s (elite) sports? From a feminist perspective, there are all kinds of legitimate concerns at play here, especially in the current era, where the diagnosis of trans people has been very much abandoned under the influence of co-essentialism, and where so much space has been created for self-identification.

The question of whether a person should be seen as male or female is left entirely up to the individual in co-essentialism, as mentioned above. This also means that people can claim to be a (trans) woman when, in the eyes of gender professionals, they may not be one at all. Because incongruent gender identity can have many different causes and, under the pressure of transactivism, the role of professionals in diagnosing it is increasingly diminished, all sorts of people can thus claim to be transgender who are not actually transgender at all.

These may be people who mistakenly believe they are transgender because of a mental (often sexual) disorder. These may include people with evil intentions (such as men who are out for the honor, fame and prize money of women’s sports, or a way to intrude into intimate women’s spaces, or who have some other motive for pretending to be different than they are). It is clear, then, that from a feminist perspective, there are all sorts of legitimate criticisms to be made of a too loose and informal definition of transgender, without immediately implying transphobic or trans-exclusive ideology (as is the case with TERFs, see AGTRT-BF43).

It is clear, then, that there can be a tension between trans inclusion on the one hand, and women’s rights on the other. But that does not mean that this tension is inevitable. Gender theory speaks of the gender inclusion problem: this is about whether it is at all possible to arrive at a trans-inclusive definition of “woman,” and if so what that looks like.

This is a battle that is sometimes fought as hard in science as it is in society. Who will win that battle is not yet known, but that it is indeed possible to arrive at definitions of male and female that are inclusive to transgender people is what we at AGTRT certainly believe. Indeed, our formal gender theory (FGT) is at the service of exactly that: developing moderate, middle-of-the-road (MotR) perspectives on the gender inclusion problem in which the interests of trans people and of feminists can be united.

In our view, the concept of formal gender is useful in this regard. This is a concept that describes the “default” meaning of gender that we make by convention with each other. Through concept engineering, and specifically the ICE method (see AGTRT-BF56), it is possible to determine for each situation and context exactly what is the best definition of man and woman there, and how gender categorization can best proceed there.

So we as a society can indeed come to common conventions with each other about the meaning of man and woman as defined in more than just physical terms. We can arrive at these kinds of conventions using reasonable models of consultation in which there is room for dialogue and civilized difference of opinion. The current gender wars and the intense polarization we see between feminists and transgender people, for example, is certainly not an inevitability in our view.

7. Primary gender identity (PHI): male, female or neutral

Many transgender and intersex persons ultimately feel they belong to one of two genders male or female. Many transgender persons want to “transition” from male to female or vice versa, and many intersex persons also feel most comfortable with one of two genders. But this is not true for all of them. Some fall between the two to such an extent that they cannot identify with either. These people are best off with a “neutral gender” as a gender identity, which we believe is a more appropriate word than the somewhat polarizing and negatively worded word “non-binary” (see also AGTRT-3 and AGTRT-BA8).

Read more about our critique of non-binary gender:
Non-binary gender through the lens of formal gender theory

Transgender and intersex persons are few and far between: they are small to very small percentages of the population, and thus, in that respect, are not easily comparable to the LGBT group, which by most estimates consists of at least a few percentage points anyway. Yet it is precisely by looking closely at these exceptions that we can learn something about how gender works in all people, and especially the psychological side of it, or psychological gender.

In these people, their being male, female or neutral is slightly different from their biological sex. Apparently, then, a distinction can be made between physical gender and psychological gender, the former being about whether we are physically male, female or neutral, and the latter being about whether we also feel male, female or neutral in our identity. As a result, we know that there is such a thing as primary gender identity (PHI): a basic sense of “I am male,” “I am female,” or “I am neutral” (see also AGTRT-BF48).

Biological (genetic and hormonal) factors play a central role in the formation and development of gender identity because the PHI is so closely related to the body. There is evidence that formation of PHI begins as early as the embryonic stage due to exposure to certain hormones. The PHI, in its basal form, is anchored in the brain even before the age of two through a psychological process of “imprinting”; that is when most children already have an awareness of their own gender.

Social and psychological factors play a minimal role in forming the basic sense of being a man, woman or neutral person: this is primarily a biological process. These factors do play a role in how primary gender identity, or the relationship with our male, female or neutral body, continues to develop as we grow up and develop. Thus, doing certain sports or physical occupations can be assumed to influence the development of PHI.

There are still a lot of open questions about (primary) gender identity (see also AGTRT-BF62 and AGTRT-BF69), but some things are gradually becoming clear:

First, there is a close relationship between primary gender identity and the biological body: the PHI can be seen as a subjective experience of bodily gender.
Second, there is a small group in whom primary gender identity deviates from (is incongruent with) their physical (and legal) gender, so we know how important it is for our well-being to have a healthy developed primary gender identity (a healthy developed subjective experience of our physical gender). For some of these people, gender transition is the only way to stop the psychological suffering caused by their incongruent gender identity (or their gender dysphoria).
Third, it can be assumed that most people are also able to articulate and develop awareness of their primary gender identity, or their subjective experience of bodily gender, from an early age.

Read more about science’s struggles with gender identity:
For now, the concept of gender identity provides more questions than answers, but concept engineering also offers perspective here

Read more about our attempt to arrive at a theory of gender identity:
In search of a theory of gender identity

8. Secondary gender identity (SGI): androgyny

Thus, psychological gender is a helpful concept to complement gender in our thinking about male and female, and what is in between. Zooming in on the exceptions to the rule – transgender and intersex – has made it clear that people possess a primary gender identity in addition to a biological sex. But there is more to be said about gender identity. Indeed, according to Androgyny-Based Gender Theory (ABGT), there is not only a primary gender identity, but also a secondary gender identity (see also AGTRT-BA24).

Read more about the secondary gender identity (SGI):
The secondary gender identity (SGI) determines the androgynous personality structure

This secondary gender identity comes to light when we look at the functioning of the human psyche in a general sense. Partly because of Carl Jung’s analytical psychology (see also AGTRT-BA7), we know that all men have a feminine side in their personality, and all women have a masculine side, whether we are aware of it or not. So this is not about the basic sense of “I am male,” “I am female” or “I am neutral” (the primary gender identity), but about the extent to which, regardless of our primary gender identity, we have developed our masculine and feminine personality traits.

Whereas primary gender identity (PGI) is about the relationship with our body, secondary gender identity (SGI) comes about in the relationship with our consciousness, especially with the archetypes animus and anima that Jung localized in the (collective) unconscious (see also AGTRT-BA8). In ABGT, it is assumed that every human being has either a male or female SGI in disposition. People with male SGI, are more likely to develop male personality traits, and people with female SGI are more likely to develop female personality traits. At the same time, those with male SGI also have the ability to develop female characteristics, and those with female SGI have the ability to develop male characteristics.

Therefore, ABGT states that every human being has one of two androgynous personality types: a dominant-male, subordinate-female (male SGI for short), or a dominant-female, subordinate-male (female SGI for short). Developing awareness of what predispositions an individual has is important, because this also gives the individual a better understanding of how the personality should continue to develop, and which personality traits should be considered dominant and which should be considered subordinate.

Because the SGI is closely related to sexuality, the development of male and female SGI also involves the development of the dominant or submissive role in sexual play. The relationship between the SGI and sexuality is complex, but at least it can be said that (cisgender) heterosexual men always have a male SGI, and (cisgender) heterosexual women always have a female SGI. Variation occurs in the LGBT group: (cisgender) gay men may have a male or a female SGI, and (cisgender) lesbian women may have a female or a male SGI. Bisexuals can also have both male and female SGI.

Be that as it may, according to ABGT, every human being has both masculine and feminine qualities (the anima and animus in Jungian thinking), which together we call secondary gender identity. These qualities are personality traits that, according to analytical psychology, can only be developed if we are fully aware of them. This awareness is a necessary condition for integrating the qualities into the personality. If these qualities are not in balance (which is actually the case in all people today to a greater or lesser extent due to patriarchal trauma), it can lead to all kinds of emotional and mental imbalance (see AGTRT-BA4 and AGTRT-BA6).

Read more about patriarchal trauma:
How patriarchy has split our psyche, and how we can repair the damage

Through shadow work, the secondary gender identity can be developed: thus, male and female qualities are better balanced (see also AGTRT-BA7). This is an intensive and multi-year process that revolves around trauma healing and is often done under the supervision of a psychotherapist. The ultimate goal is to achieve greater autonomy and maturity. People who engage in shadow work develop a more integrated personality, characterized, according to Jung, by powerful androgynous qualities, such as balance, authenticity, self-awareness and self-assurance.

Read more about shadow work:
With shadow work shine light on your unconscious malice

9. Social gender

Finally, there is the social and cultural side of the story. A woman in the Netherlands of 2023 is a different person than a woman in the Netherlands of 1623. A man in the Netherlands is different from a man in Kenya. A man who does a lot of soccer develops his masculinity in a community with different gender norms than a man who does a lot of online gaming.

All of these issues have to do with gender roles and gender norms: another thing other than biological sex. Not only are you born male or female, but you are then made male or female by roles, rituals and norms in society. When sociology talks about masculinity and femininity, it usually refers to the latter process.

All societies have their own gender roles and gender norms: they are always evolving. But at its foundation, gender relations at the societal level can only be classified in two ways: patriarchal or matriarchal. In a patriarchal culture, masculinity and femininity are arranged vertically, in a more matriarchal culture horizontally (see also AGTRT-BA9).

Matriarchal cultures are currently a rarity on Earth, but there are all kinds of indications that humanity will move back to them in the coming decades, after 12,000 years of patriarchal culture. These types of social shifts are the result of shifts in collective human consciousness (secondary gender identity), and thus can only be understood in terms of gender and not sex.

Read more about the difference between patriarchal and matriarchal societies:
What is the difference between patriarchal and matriarchal cultures?

10. Conclusion: gender is here to stay

In conclusion, then, gender as a concept has several applications. Indeed, most people are biologically male or female, and their primary gender identity is consistent with this sex (they have a congruent gender identity, or are cisgender). At the same time, there are people with an incongruent gender identity or an intersex condition, for whom gender and sex start to diverge. Some of them form a small neutral middle group. Thus, one could say that despite gender dimorphism, there are three (primary) genders among people: male, female and neutral.

But gender is not only relevant to people with gender dysphoria or an intersex condition. Each person has a primary gender identity, and will need to develop a healthy relationship with their physical gender for personal well-being and happiness. In addition, all people have a secondary gender identity. There is a lot of work for all of us to do there as well, even those who have a more simple and balanced primary gender identity. After all, we all grew up in a patriarchal culture, resulting in an imbalance between our masculine and feminine qualities. Every person can take steps to restore balance with shadow work.

The distinction between male and female may seem like a simple and binary biological issue, but if you look at legal gender, formal gender, psychological gender and social gender in addition to physical gender, you will see that there is a lot more to it. Man and woman throughout history, in all cultures and in all times, have never been defined purely and solely physically.

The roles, norms, relationships, behaviors, structures and identities inseparable from men and women make things complex. The meaning of man and woman is always also a convention: it is not only about biology, but always about agreements we make with each other. It is precisely the creation of these agreements that we want to streamline and make transparent with FGT, so that social discussions about the difference between men and women, which will always return anyway, are as efficient and civilized as possible.

Read more about formal gender:
Why gender science may pay more attention to formal gender

Gender is not just a buzzword that adds nothing to biological sex and that we might as well do without. The word gives language to all kinds of deep layers of manhood and womanhood. Gender is of all times and all cultures, and will always be part of human societies. It’s about how we shape our gender in identity. About how we all deal with the masculine and feminine sides of our personalities, and about how masculinity and femininity, as well as manhood and womanhood, come about through roles, norms and conventions in our society. In short: gender is here to stay.