Gender-Abolitionism Vs. The Micro-Genders of Neo-Themyscira
- Consequently, creating a genuinely “post-gender” society would demand either the complete abolition of ALL sexual difference (and given the sexual versatility of the human mind, this would probably mean making everyone *completely* identical), or the complete abolition of ALL sexuality and sexual identity, to the point that human difference would no longer be considered sexually significant, and gender would be indistinct from any other form of acknowledging or expressing human difference.
I don’t agree, but it’s probably because we have different ideas of what “abolishing gender” would entail.
Crudely, the idea of “post-gender” can be broken into two types:
- Flattening gender down so that everyone ends up the impersonal same - the Mao-suit model of gender. This has all the flaws you’ve named.
- Exploding gender out into 7 billion personal shades - a blizzard of diversity in which the original binary becomes just two more reference points in the storm.
Obviously I’d like to advocate for the latter.
Contrast what happens to trans people in each model:
- We are somehow “content with what we have”, because there’s no direction to turn except the omnipresent unisex. Trans people are erased (one way or the other).
- Each of us makes whatever adjustments to our body and presentation we prefer, using surgery, clothes, or <insert new technology here>. In fact, making adjustments to your body is pretty normal. Trans people don’t disappear, but we’re less obvious, because of all the other people doing far less subtle stuff like genetically engineering themselves wings.