Mick Hartley

Helen Joyce, perceptive as always, speaking in Australia:

Another reason we don’t see the emptiness of gender medicine is that gender clinics are doing a damn good imitation of medicine. Judith Butler famously said gender was an “imitation for which there is no original” – that it’s meaningful only because we do it over and over again. Well, the people working in gender medicine are performing the rituals of medicine: making appointments, doing consultations, coming up with diagnoses, writing prescriptions, doing blood tests, referring patients to other specialists like surgeons and endocrinologists, and making claims about outcomes and efficacy. When they interact with funding bodies, insurers and governments they talk as if what they are doing is medicine.

But the rituals are empty, in the same way that Butler claimed gender rituals are empty. The expression “gender dysphoria” functions as nothing more than a placeholder to make sentences that look similar in form to the kinds of sentences you might utter about angina, say, or multiple sclerosis, or schizophrenia, but because the expression is meaningless the sentences are meaningless.

In fact gender medicine is purely performative – which should delight queer theorists, since they love performativity. And the theme of the performance is the hyper-liberal, or hyper-individualist, claim that each person has a true self and knows that true self, and when they give expression to that true self they by definition cannot be wrong because the true self is the declaration. The purpose of gender medicine is to give an appearance of solidity to a specific sort of declaration of one’s true self — to your gender identity. What the clinics are selling is identity validation.

It may look like medicine and it may talk like medicine – but it isn’t medicine. Rather like trans women, in fact – they may look like women, and they make talk like women, but they’re not women. It’s all performative.