Transvestigation has gained significant attention in recent times. For those who are unfamiliar, this term describes the act of meticulously analyzing individuals' appearances for supposed indicators of being transgender. There are fervent “transvestigators” who dedicate considerable time to scrutinizing celebrity images, often asserting that numerous Hollywood stars are secretly transgender. This phenomenon has been documented in various articles and YouTube videos that highlight online communities focused on this pursuit.

A recent example of this phenomenon is the backlash against Olympic boxer Imane Khelif, who, despite being recognized as female by the International Olympic Committee, faced harsh criticism from high-profile figures like JK Rowling and Elon Musk. These individuals wrongly assumed Khelif was a trans woman, illustrating a broader misunderstanding of gender identity, especially when no trans women participated in the Olympics that year.

Many discussions surrounding transvestigation tend to dismiss it as a bizarre conspiracy or a byproduct of intense transphobia, suggesting that the rest of society perceives gender accurately. However, this perspective overlooks the complexity of how individuals interpret gender, revealing that our perceptions can vary dramatically.

In my recent publication, Sexed Up, I delve into the intricacies of how we understand sex and gender. My earlier work, Whipping Girl, also addressed the challenges faced by transgender and nonconforming individuals due to societal perceptions. In this essay, I aim to clarify the concept of transvestigation, its origins, and the more common, albeit problematic, ways in which we perceive gender and sexual minorities.

Part 1: The Two Filing Cabinets Mindset

In her anti-trans book Trans, gender-critical activist Helen Joyce asserts that humans have an innate ability to identify others' sex with remarkable accuracy. This belief is echoed by columnist Megan McArdle, who speculated that Khelif might be intersex, claiming that people can easily distinguish between males and females, even among androgynous individuals. This notion that categorizing individuals as male or female is an almost infallible human skill is a misconception held predominantly by cisgender individuals.

As I discuss in Sexed Up (p. 25), many people operate under the illusion that gender categorization is straightforward, often based on their own experiences of being consistently identified correctly. In contrast, transgender or gender nonconforming individuals frequently navigate a complex landscape where their gender may be perceived differently at various times or even simultaneously.

In Chapter 1 of Sexed Up (“The Two Filing Cabinets in Our Minds”), I explore how children learn to understand gender, highlighting that this understanding is not instinctual but acquired over time. Children typically begin to recognize gender distinctions around ages one or two, a phase known as "gender labeling." However, young children rely on different cues than adults, often basing their assumptions on gender expression, such as clothing or hair length, rather than biological traits. They also tend to have a more fluid understanding of gender; for instance, if shown images of a boy in both casual attire and a dress, they might conclude that the boy's gender has changed.

The concept of "gender constancy," the belief that a person's sex remains unchanged throughout life, usually develops between ages four and seven. Although earlier researchers viewed this as a sophisticated understanding, it may oversimplify the complexities of gender as understood today.

Through my personal experiences during my own transition, particularly during a phase when I was still navigating my gender identity, I discovered that others often categorized me as either male or female based on their perceptions, resulting in confusion and skepticism when I revealed my true gender. This tendency to filter out ambiguous cues once a determination has been made has been noted in sociological studies.

Thus, I argue that we possess metaphorical filing cabinets in our minds, one labeled “male” and the other “female,” where we unconsciously place individuals based on our immediate impressions. This learned behavior is not universal; some cultures acknowledge multiple genders beyond the binary framework, and it is possible to challenge and unlearn this mindset through greater exposure to diverse gender identities.

Gender-critical activists like Joyce maintain that “biological sex” is strictly binary and unchangeable, a view that stems from their own perceptions rather than an objective reality. This narrow perspective leads them to disregard any evidence that contradicts their beliefs, further entrenching their biases.

Part 2: Ungendering and “The Look”

The combination of the Two Filing Cabinets mindset and the belief in gender constancy results in what I term cis assumption, the presumption that everyone we encounter is cisgender by default. This mindset underlies discussions about trans individuals being "closeted" or the concept of "passing" as cisgender. In my book Whipping Girl, I introduced the notion of ungendering, which occurs when individuals are perceived as cis, and their gender is accepted as authentic. However, upon learning someone is transgender, people often start searching for signs that contradict that identity, a reaction I’ve experienced firsthand countless times.

The “look” that often accompanies this ungendering process reflects a conscious re-evaluation of an individual's gender, usually marked by a few awkward seconds of confusion. While being subjected to this gaze can be uncomfortable, it is sometimes an attempt to reclassify someone from one gender category to another.

However, the more distressing aspect occurs when individuals use this look to ungender a trans person, focusing on perceived incongruities in their gender presentation that would normally be overlooked in cis individuals. This reflects a belief in gender constancy, where one may insist on uncovering an individual's “real” sex, aiming to invalidate their gender identity. This ungendering is often driven by anti-trans ideologies, perpetuating the notion that trans identities are somehow fraudulent.

There are also instances where individuals who are not overtly anti-trans engage in ungendering for various reasons. In my analysis of ungendering in academia and art, I noted how some scholars choose trans and intersex subjects for their work, often stripping them of their humanity and reducing them to mere objects of inquiry. This dynamic highlights how ungendering can be perceived as an acceptable practice for marginalized groups, despite being invasive and demeaning.

With this context, we can now define transvestigation as the act of ungendering someone perceived to be cis under the belief that they are “secretly” transgender.

Part 3: Delusions of “Gaydar” and “Transdar”

Understanding why transvestigation occurs necessitates a discussion about the concept of “transdar,” an analogous term to “gaydar.” “Gaydar” refers to the alleged ability to determine someone's sexual orientation through observation, often held by those with limited familiarity with LGB communities. This belief is problematic, as sexual orientation and gender expression are distinct traits that do not always correlate.

Several studies have demonstrated that what we believe shapes how we perceive others. This phenomenon extends to transdar, where individuals believe they can identify transgender people based on appearance. I recall times in my early twenties when I thought I could accurately identify trans individuals. However, I later realized that assumptions about gender identity based solely on appearance are often misguided.

As I engaged more with trans and queer communities, it became increasingly apparent that gender identity and orientation cannot be accurately predicted based on outward appearances. This understanding has led to the contemporary practice of sharing pronouns, which stems from recognizing the limitations of our assumptions about others' genders.

Part 4: Dismantling the Two Filing Cabinets Mindset (for better or worse)

Although transdar is often unreliable, it can represent a step toward recognizing the complexity of gender. While previously relying on the Two Filing Cabinets mindset, I began to notice gender-ambiguous traits, leading to a greater appreciation for the diversity of human sex characteristics.

This understanding ultimately helped me realize that transitioning was a feasible option for me, as I came to see gender as a spectrum rather than a strict binary. Unfortunately, many cis individuals remain entrenched in the Two Filing Cabinets mindset, making it difficult to convey the nuances of gender identity.

Despite increasing visibility for transgender individuals, some cis people misinterpret this exposure, often leading to misconceptions about gender. An example of this occurred in a social media exchange where a prominent figure asserted that gender-atypical traits indicated someone was trans, failing to appreciate the diversity of human experiences.

Part 5: Believing Is Seeing

Both transvestigators and gender-critical activists exhibit distorted perceptions of gender, often leading to conflicting conclusions. While some individuals are primed to see transgender identities everywhere, others view trans people as threats, leading to harmful consequences, as seen in the case of Imane Khelif.

Understanding these biases is crucial, as they highlight how societal narratives shape our perceptions of gender. The tendency to oversimplify gender categories often leads to misunderstandings and reinforces harmful stereotypes about marginalized groups.

Part 6: Other Perceptual Biases (or why trans women, gender non-conforming women, and women of color, are especially affected)

It is evident that there is no single or correct way to perceive gender and sex. Various biases influence how we categorize others, often leading to misinterpretations. Research suggests that male attributes tend to dominate in mixed-gender presentations, causing trans women and gender-nonconforming individuals to be misread frequently.

Moreover, racial biases play a significant role in how women of color are perceived, often leading to stereotypes that can further exacerbate the challenges they face. The intersection of race, gender, and sexual orientation results in a complex landscape of perception that can be detrimental to marginalized groups.

Conclusion

Most people believe they perceive the world accurately, yet this essay aims to challenge that notion. Recognizing the vast spectrum of human gender and sexual diversity can lead to a more nuanced understanding of identity. Overcoming stigmas associated with trans identities is crucial, as these misconceptions perpetuate harmful narratives.

Ultimately, trans individuals are part of the fabric of society, representing a diverse and vibrant community. If you find yourself fixated on trans identities, it may be worth examining your own perceptions and biases, as a more inclusive understanding can lead to a richer appreciation of the complexities of gender and identity in contemporary society.

This essay was made possible by my Patreon supporters — if you appreciate it, please consider supporting me there! A non-paywalled version of the same essay can also be found on Substack.