This book analyzes the foundational frame of legal reasoning when courts interpret the 'plain language' and 'ordinary meaning' of terms such as 'sex', 'man' and 'woman'. There is a rich and complicated line of cases on how to define these terms and how to legally categorize transgender people. When dealing with different legal issues, judges need to give a clear 'yes' or 'no', determinate answer to a legal question. Marginal categorizations could be problematic even for experts. The book analyses nine decisions that relate to transgender people's workplace protection under Title VII in United States and the right to marry in United Kingdom and Hong Kong. It brings in a historical discussion of the development of interpretative practices of law and legal categorization of transgender individuals across past decades, drawing on the intricate relationship between time and statutory interpretation.
This book challenges law’s reliance on neurology’s brain-sex binary. The brain has become the latest candidate in a historical search for a reliable and fixed biological marker of ‘true sex’ that has permeated every aspect of Western culture, including law. As definitions of the sexed and gendered body have become ever more contentious, the development and dissemination of brain-sex theories have come to dominate popular understanding of LGBTI+ identities. But, this book argues, the brain is no more helpful than earlier biological measures in ensuring just outcomes. Examining how law determines and differentiates ‘male’ and ‘female’ in two contested areas of sexed identity –through a discussion of Australian cases authorising medical interventions to alter the embodied sex characteristics of transgender minors and intersex minors –the book demonstrates an incoherence in the legal understanding of gender identity development. As the brain too fails as a convincing biological anchor for the binary sex categories of male and female, law must, it is argued, retreat from its aspiration to create, define, and regulate artificially bounded sex categories of male and female.
The Gender Recognition Act (GRA) has often been described as a groundbreaking and progressive legal framework for allowing people to legally change their gender. This book seeks to challenge this representation by drawing on in-depth qualitative interviews with trans people about the GRA. Theoretically this book uses the concepts of legal consciousness, agency and emotion to highlight the normative underpinnings of the GRA. Overall, the book contends, the GRA does not accurately reflect many trans people's own understanding of their gender identity or their sexuality. It is designed to create subjects that govern their behaviour and self-expression in a way that aligns with a purely binary model of sex/gender and sexuality. Although a deviation from these norms does not incur any direct punishment, it indirectly leads to a denial of rights and legal protections. By reviewing relevant legislation and case law, and through qualitative research, the book establishes how, instead of uncritically accepting or completely rejecting the GRA, trans people enact their singular identities by engaging strategically with law.
