1932

Abstract

The growing visibility of transgender and nonbinary people raises important sociological questions about how the structure of sex and gender is shifting and underscores necessary changes to research practice. We review what is known about emerging gender identities and their implications for sociological understandings of the relationship between sex and gender and the maintenance of the sex/gender system of inequality. Transgender and nonbinary identities are increasingly common among younger cohorts and improved survey measurements of sex and gender are expanding information about these changes. In the United States, an additional gender category seems to be solidifying in public usage even as the higher status of masculinity over femininity persists. The continuing power of the normative binary contributes to both violent backlash and characteristic patterns of discrimination against gender diverse people; yet, underlying support for nondiscrimination in the workplace is stronger than commonly recognized. New, more consistent efforts to account for gender diversity in social science research are needed to fully understand these changes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-030222-035327
2024-08-12
2025-02-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/soc/50/1/annurev-soc-030222-035327.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-030222-035327&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abelson MJ. 2019.. Men in Place: Trans Masculinity, Race, and Sexuality in America. Minneapolis, MN:: Univ. Minn. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ainsworth C. 2015.. Sex redefined. . Nature 518:(7539):28891
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aksoy B, Carpenter CS, Sansone D. 2024.. Understanding labor market discrimination against transgender people: evidence from a double list experiment and a survey. . Manag. Sci. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Albert K, Delano M. 2022.. Sex trouble: sex/gender slippage, sex confusion, and sex obsession in machine learning using electronic health records. . Patterns 3:(8):100534
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  5. Alfrey L, Twine FW. 2017.. Gender-fluid geek girls: negotiating inequality regimes in the tech industry. . Gend. Soc. 31:(1):2850
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  6. Barbee H, Schrock D. 2019.. Un/gendering social selves: how nonbinary people navigate and experience a binarily gendered world. . Sociol. Forum 34:(3):57293
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  7. Blosnich JR, Butcher BA, Mortali MG, Lane AD, Haas AP. 2022.. Training death investigators to identify decedents’ sexual orientation and gender identity: a feasibility study. . Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 43:(1):4045
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowker GC, Star SL. 2000.. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bridges T, Moore MR. 2018.. Young women of color and shifting sexual identities. . Contexts 17:(1):8688
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  10. Broussard KA, Warner RH. 2019.. Gender nonconformity is perceived differently for cisgender and transgender targets. . Sex Roles 80:(7):40928
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown A. 2022.. About 5% of young adults in the US say their gender is different from their sex assigned at birth. Short Read, Pew Res. Cent., Washington, DC:. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/06/07/about-5-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-say-their-gender-is-different-from-their-sex-assigned-at-birth/
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brubaker R. 2015.. Grounds for Difference. Cambridge, MA:: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Brubaker R. 2023.. Exit, voice, and gender. . Sociol. Theory 41:(2):15474
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  14. Butler J. 1990.. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Carpenter CS, Eppink ST, Gonzales G. 2020.. Transgender status, gender identity, and socioeconomic outcomes in the United States. . Ind. Labor. Relat. Rev. 73:(3):57399
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  16. CDADI (Steer. Comm. Anti-Discrim. Divers. Incl.). 2022.. Thematic report on legal gender recognition in Europe: first thematic implementation review report on recommendation CM/Rec20105. Rep., Counc. Eur. , Strasbourg, Fr:. https://rm.coe.int/thematic-report-on-legal-gender-recognition-in-europe-2022/1680a729b3
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Charles M, Bradley K. 2009.. Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries. . Am. J. Sociol. 114:(4):92476
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  18. Charlesworth TES, Banaji MR. 2022.. Patterns of implicit and explicit stereotypes III: long-term change in gender stereotypes. . Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 13:(1):1426
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  19. Charlesworth TES, Yang V, Mann TC, Kurdi B, Banaji MR. 2021.. Gender stereotypes in natural language: word embeddings show robust consistency across child and adult language corpora of more than 65 million words. . Psychol. Sci. 32:(2):21840
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  20. Chavez K, Wingfield AH. 2018.. Racializing gendered interactions. . In Handbook of the Sociology of Gender, ed. BJ Risman, CM Froyum, WJ Scarborough , pp. 18597. New York:: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cheryan S, Markus HR. 2020.. Masculine defaults: identifying and mitigating hidden cultural biases. . Psychol. Rev. 127:(6):102252
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  22. Compton D, Meadow T, Schilt K, eds. 2018.. Other, Please Specify: Queer Methods in Sociology. Oakland:: Univ. Calif. Press. , 1st ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Connell C. 2010.. Doing, undoing, or redoing gender? Learning from the workplace experiences of transpeople. . Gend. Soc. 24:(1):3155
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  24. Connell RW. 1985.. Theorising gender. . Sociology 19:(2):26072
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  25. Conron KJ, O'Neill KK. 2022.. Food insufficiency among transgender adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rep. , Williams Inst., Los Angeles:. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-food-insufficiency-covid/
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Currah P. 2022.. Sex Is as Sex Does. New York:: New York Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Darwin H. 2020.. Challenging the cisgender/transgender binary: nonbinary people and the transgender label. . Gend. Soc. 34:(3):35780
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  28. Davis G. 2015.. Contesting Intersex: The Dubious Diagnosis. New York:: New York Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Davis G, Dewey JM, Murphy EL. 2016.. Giving sex: deconstructing intersex and trans medicalization practices. . Gend. Soc. 30:(3):490514
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  30. de Vries KM. 2012.. Intersectional identities and conceptions of the self: the experience of transgender people. . Symb. Interact. 35:(1):4967
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  31. DeVun L. 2021.. The Shape of Sex: Nonbinary Gender from Genesis to the Renaissance. New York:: Columbia Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Diamond LM, Butterworth M. 2008.. Questioning gender and sexual identity: dynamic links over time. . Sex Roles 59:(5):36576
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  33. Doan L, Quadlin N, Powell B. 2022.. Attitudes toward formal rights and informal privileges for transgender people: evidence from a national survey experiment. . In Demography of Transgender, Nonbinary and Gender Minority Populations, ed. AK Baumle, S Nordmarken , pp. 4772. New York:: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Dray KK, Smith VRE, Kostecki TP, Sabat IE, Thomson CR. 2020.. Moving beyond the gender binary: examining workplace perceptions of nonbinary and transgender employees. . Gend. Work Organ. 27:(6):118191
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  35. DuBois LZ, Shattuck-Heidorn H. 2021.. Challenging the binary: gender/sex and the bio-logics of normalcy. . Am. J. Hum. Biol. 33:(5):e23623
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  36. Eagly AH, Nater C, Miller DI, Kaufmann M, Sczesny S. 2020.. Gender stereotypes have changed: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. . Am. Psychol. 75:(3):30115
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  37. Eder S. 2022.. How the Clinic Made Gender: The Medical History of a Transformative Idea. Chicago:: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  38. England P. 2010.. The gender revolution: uneven and stalled. . Gend. Soc. 24:(2):14966
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  39. Fausto-Sterling A. 1993.. The five sexes. . Sciences 33:(2):2024
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  40. Fausto-Sterling A. 2005.. The bare bones of sex: part 1—sex and gender. . Signs 30:(2):1491527
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  41. Ferree MM, Lorber J, Hess BB, eds. 1999.. Revisioning Gender. Walnut Creek, CA:: Rowman Altamira
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Fielding S. 2020.. “ The system is unfair”: US trans and non-binary people hit by voting barriers. . The Guardian, June 16. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/16/trans-people-voting-november-election
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Flores AR, Herman J, Gates GJ, Brown TN. 2016.. How many adults identify as transgender in the United States? Rep. , Williams Inst., Los Angeles:. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Fogarty AA, Zheng L. 2018.. Gender Ambiguity in the Workplace: Transgender and Gender-Diverse Discrimination. Santa Barbara, CA:: Praeger
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Frohard-Dourlent H, Dobson S, Clark BA, Doull M, Saewyc EM. 2017.. “ I would have preferred more options”: accounting for non-binary youth in health research. . Nurs. Inq. 24:(1):e12150
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  46. Fujimura JH. 2006.. Sex genes: a critical sociomaterial approach to the politics and molecular genetics of sex determination. . Signs 32:(1):4982
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. Gagné P, Tewksbury R, McGaughey D. 1997.. Coming out and crossing over: identity formation and proclamation in a transgender community. . Gend. Soc. 11:(4):478508
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  48. Garrison S. 2018.. On the limits of “trans enough”: authenticating trans identity narratives. . Gend. Soc. 32:(5):61337
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  49. Garrison S. 2022.. “Trans enough” for Tumblr? Gender. accountability, identity challenge, and the duality of sociotechnical affordances in online communities for TNB emerging adults. PhD Diss. , Univ. Mich., Ann Arbor, MI:
    [Google Scholar]
  50. GenIUSS Group. 2014.. Best practices for asking questions to identify transgender and other gender minority respondents on population-based surveys. Rep. , Williams Inst., Los Angeles:. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/geniuss-trans-pop-based-survey/
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Glick JL, Theall K, Andrinopoulos K, Kendall C. 2018.. For data's sake: dilemmas in the measurement of gender minorities. . Cult. Health Sex. 20:(12):136277
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  52. Goldberg SK, Rothblum ED, Russell ST, Meyer IH. 2020.. Exploring the Q in LGBTQ: demographic characteristic and sexuality of queer people in a US representative sample of sexual minorities. . Psychol. Sex. Orientat. Gend. Divers. 7:(1):10112
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  53. Gonsalves T. 2020.. Gender identity, the sexed body, and the medical making of transgender. . Gend. Soc. 34:(6):100533
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  54. Gonsalves T. 2024.. Elaborating embodied boundaries: medical expertise and (trans)gender classification. . Am. J. Sociol. 129:(5):131158
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  55. Grasso C, Goldhammer H, Thompson J, Keuroghlian AS. 2021.. Optimizing gender-affirming medical care through anatomical inventories, clinical decision support, and population health management in electronic health record systems. . J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 28:(11):253135
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  56. Greene JT. 2019.. Categorical exclusions: how racialized gender regulation reproduces reentry hardship. . Soc. Probl. 66:(4):54863
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  57. Greene JT, Ervin W. 2024.. The cost of crossing gender boundaries: trans women of color and the racialized workplace gender order. . Gend. Work Organ. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Haig D. 2004.. The inexorable rise of gender and the decline of sex: social change in academic titles, 1945–2001. . Arch. Sex Behav. 33:(2):8796
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  59. Hammack PL, Hughes SD, Atwood JM, Cohen EM, Clark RC. 2022.. Gender and sexual identity in adolescence: a mixed-methods study of labeling in diverse community settings. . J. Adolesc. Res. 37:(2):167220
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  60. Hart CG, Saperstein A, Magliozzi D, Westbrook L. 2019.. Gender and health: beyond binary categorical measurement. . J. Health Soc. Behav. 60:(1):10118
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  61. Hatch HA, Warner RH, Broussard KA, Harton HC. 2022.. Predictors of transgender prejudice: a meta-analysis. . Sex Roles 87:(11):583602
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  62. Heidari S, Babor TF, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. 2016.. Sex and gender equity in research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. . Res. Integr. Peer Rev. 1:(1):2
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  63. Henderson ER, Blosnich JR, Herman JL, Meyer IH. 2019.. Considerations on sampling in transgender health disparities research. . LGBT Health 6:(6):26770
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  64. Hennekam S, Ladge JJ. 2023.. Free to be me? Evolving gender expression and the dynamic interplay between authenticity and the desire to be accepted at work. . Acad. Manag. J. 66:(5):152953
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  65. Herdt G. 1993.. Third Sex, Third Gender: Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture and History. Brooklyn, NY:: Zone
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Herman JL, Flores AR, O'Neill KK. 2022.. How many adults and youth identify as transgender in the United States? Rep. , Williams Inst., Los Angeles:. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-adults-united-states/
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Hernandez J. 2021.. The U.S. issues the first passport with a nonbinary gender “X” option. . NPR, Oct. 27. https://www.npr.org/2021/10/27/1049690803/state-department-first-passport-with-nonbinary-gender-x-option
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Hines S. 2020.. Sex wars and (trans) gender panics: identity and body politics in contemporary UK feminism. . Sociol. Rev. 68:(4):699717
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  69. Hossain A. 2017.. The paradox of recognition: hijra, third gender and sexual rights in Bangladesh. . Cult. Health Sex. 19:(12):141831
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  70. Hyde JS, Bigler RS, Joel D, Tate CC, van Anders SM. 2019.. The future of sex and gender in psychology: five challenges to the gender binary. . Am. Psychol. 74:(2):17193
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  71. Joel D. 2021.. Beyond the binary: rethinking sex and the brain. . Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 122::16575
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  72. Johnson AH. 2015.. Normative accountability: how the medical model influences transgender identities and experiences. . Sociol. Compass 9:(9):80313
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  73. Jones JM. 2022.. LGBT identification in U.S. ticks up to 7.1%. . Gallup, Feb. 17. https://news.gallup.com/poll/389792/lgbt-identification-ticks-up.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Jordan-Young RM. 2011.. Brain Storm: The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences. Cambridge, MA:: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Jordan-Young RM, Karkazis K. 2019.. Testosterone: An Unauthorized Biography. Cambridge, MA:: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Kennedy L, Khanna K, Simpson D, Gelman A, Jia Y, Teitler J. 2022.. Using sex and gender in survey adjustment. . arXiv:2009.14401 [stat.AP]
  77. Kessler SJ, McKenna W. 1978.. Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach. New York:: John Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Khanna K, Meadow T. 2023.. The fragile male: an experimental study of transgender classification and the durability of gender categories. . Gend. Soc. 37:(4):55383
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  79. Kline NS, Webb NJ, Johnson KC, Yording HD, Griner SB, Brunell DJ. 2023.. Mapping transgender policies in the US 2017–2021: the role of geography and implications for health equity. . Health Place 80::102985
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  80. Kolber J. 2023.. Gender category and gender status: a critical distinction. . Symb. Interact. 46:(4):41739
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  81. Labuski C, Keo-Meier C. 2015.. The (mis)measure of trans. . Transgender Stud. Q. 2:(1):1333
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  82. Lagos D. 2022.. Has there been a transgender tipping point? Gender identification differences in U.S. cohorts born between 1935 and 2001. . Am. J. Sociol. 128:(1):94143
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  83. Lewis DC, Flores AR, Haider-Markel DP, Miller PR, Taylor JK. 2022.. Transitioning opinion? Assessing the dynamics of public attitudes toward transgender rights. . Public Opin. Q. 86:(2):34368
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  84. Lorber J. 1996.. Beyond the binaries: depolarizing the categories of sex, sexuality, and gender. . Sociol. Inq. 66:(2):14360
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  85. Lucal B. 1999.. What it means to be gendered me: life on the boundaries of a dichotomous gender system. . Gend. Soc. 13:(6):78197
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  86. Magliozzi D, Saperstein A, Westbrook L. 2016.. Scaling up: representing gender diversity in survey research. . Socius 2:. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023116664352
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  87. Marcotte M, Cichoń M, DeSalvo N, Medeiros K, Gadbois S, Alberti-Silverstein J. 2023.. Beyond wokeness: why we should all be using a more “sensitive” measure of self-reported gender identity. . Psychol. Rep. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Martin AE, Mason MF. 2022.. What does it mean to be (seen as) human? The importance of gender in humanization. . J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 123:(2):292315
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  89. Martin AE, Slepian ML. 2021.. The primacy of gender: gendered cognition underlies the big two dimensions of social cognition. . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 16:(6):114358
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  90. Meadow T. 2018.. Trans Kids: Being Gendered in the Twenty-First Century. Berkeley:: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Mishel E, England P, Ford J, Caudillo ML. 2020.. Cohort increases in sex with same-sex partners: Do trends vary by gender, race, and class?. Gend. Soc. 34:(2):178209
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  92. Monro S, Carpenter M, Crocetti D, Davis G, Garland F, et al. 2021.. Intersex: cultural and social perspectives. . Cult. Health Sex. 23:(4):43140
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  93. Morgenroth T, Ryan MK. 2021.. The effects of gender trouble: an integrative theoretical framework of the perpetuation and disruption of the gender/sex binary. . Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 16:(6):111342
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  94. Mov. Adv. Proj. 2024.. Identity document laws and policies. . Mov. Adv. Proj. Accessed Jan. 23, 2024. https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/identity_documents
    [Google Scholar]
  95. NASEM (Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med.). 2022.. Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation. Washington, DC:: Natl. Acad. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Nordmarken S. 2023.. Coming into identity: how gender minorities experience identity formation. . Gend. Soc. 37:(4):584613
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  97. OCSOTUS (Off. Chief Stat. U.S.). 2023.. Recommendations on the best practices for the collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data on federal statistical surveys. Rep. , US Off. Chief Stat., Washington, DC:. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/SOGI-Best-Practices.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  98. OMB (Off. Manag. Budg.). 2024.. Revisions to OMB's statistical policy directive no. 15: standards for maintaining, collecting, and presenting federal data on race and ethnicity. Rep. , US Off. Manag. Budg., Washington, DC:. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/29/2024-06469/revisions-to-ombs-statistical-policy-directive-no-15-standards-for-maintaining-collecting-and
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Oswald F, Champion A, Walton K, Pedersen CL. 2023.. Revealing more than gender: rigid gender-role beliefs and transphobia are related to engagement with fetal sex celebrations. . Psychol. Sex. Orientat. Gend. Divers. 10:(2):30410
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  100. Parker K, Horowitz JM, Brown A. 2022.. Americans’ complex views on gender identity and transgender issues. Rep. , Pew Res. Cent., Washington, DC:. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Puckett JA, Brown NC, Dunn T, Mustanski B, Newcomb ME. 2020.. Perspectives from transgender and gender diverse people on how to ask about gender. . LGBT Health 7:(6):30511
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  102. Puckett JA, Tornello S, Mustanski B, Newcomb ME. 2022.. Gender variations, generational effects, and mental health of transgender people in relation to timing and status of gender identity milestones. . Psychol. Sex. Orientat. Gend. Divers. 9:(2):16578
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  103. Quadlin N. 2018.. The mark of a woman's record: gender and academic performance in hiring. . Am. Sociol. Rev. 83:(2):33160
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  104. Quinan CL, Bresser N. 2020.. Gender at the border: global responses to gender-diverse subjectivities and nonbinary registration practices. . Glob. Perspect. 1:(1):12553
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  105. Rahilly E. 2022.. “ Well duh, that's how you raise a kid”: gender-open parenting in a (non)binary world. . LGBTQ+ Fam. 18:(3):26280
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Ridgeway CL. 2011.. Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Ridgeway CL, Correll SJ. 2004.. Unpacking the gender system: a theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. . Gend. Soc. 18:(4):51031
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  108. Ridgeway CL, Kricheli-Katz T. 2013.. Intersecting cultural beliefs in social relations: gender, race, and class binds and freedoms. . Gend. Soc. 27:(3):294318
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  109. Risman BJ. 2004.. Gender as a social structure: theory wrestling with activism. . Gend. Soc. 18:(4):42950
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  110. Risman BJ, Travers, Fleming C. 2022.. Category X: What does the visibility of people who reject the gender binary mean for the gender structure?. About Gend. 11:(21). https://doi.org/10.15167/2279-5057/AG2022.11.21.2005
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Ritz SA, Greaves L. 2022.. Transcending the male-female binary in biomedical research: constellations, heterogeneity, and mechanism when considering sex and gender. . Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19:(7):4083
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  112. Rosenthal GS. 2023.. Gender-affirming care has a long history in the US—and not just for transgender people. . The Conversation, March 27. http://theconversation.com/gender-affirming-care-has-a-long-history-in-the-us-and-not-just-for-transgender-people-201752
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Rubin G. 1975.. The traffic in women: notes on the “political economy” of sex. . In Toward an Anthropology of Women, ed. RR Reiter , pp. 157210. New York:: Mon. Rev.
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Russell ST, Bishop MD, Fish JN. 2023.. Expanding notions of LGBTQ+. . Annu. Rev. Sociol. 49::28196
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  115. Saguy AC, Williams JA. 2022.. A little word that means a lot: a reassessment of singular they in a new era of gender politics. . Gend. Soc. 36:(1):531
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  116. Santos HC, Varnum MEW, Grossmann I. 2017.. Global increases in individualism. . Psychol. Sci. 28:(9):122839
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  117. Saperstein A, Westbrook L. 2021.. Categorical and gradational: alternative survey measures of sex and gender. . Eur. J. Politics Gend. 4:(1):1130
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  118. Schilt K. 2010.. Just One of the Guys? Transgender Men and the Persistence of Gender Inequality. Chicago:: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Schilt K. 2015.. Born this way: thinking sociologically about essentialism. . In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, ed. RA Scott, RH Scott, SM Kosslyn, M Buchmann , pp. 114. New York:: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Schilt K, Lagos D. 2017.. The development of transgender studies in sociology. . Annu. Rev. Sociol. 43::42543
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  121. Schudson ZC, Morgenroth T. 2022.. Non-binary gender/sex identities. . Curr. Opin. Psychol. 48::101499
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  122. Shannon M. 2022.. The labour market outcomes of transgender individuals. . Labour Econ. 77::102006
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  123. Shteyler VM, Clarke JA, Adashi EY. 2020.. Failed assignments—rethinking sex designations on birth certificates. . N. Engl. J. Med. 383:(25):2399401
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  124. shuster sm. 2021.. Trans Medicine: The Emergence and Practice of Treating Gender. New York:: New York Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  125. shuster sm, Westbrook L. 2022.. Reducing the joy deficit in sociology: a study of transgender joy. . Soc. Probl. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spac034
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Springer KW, Mager Stellman J, Jordan-Young RM. 2012.. Beyond a catalogue of differences: a theoretical frame and good practice guidelines for researching sex/gender in human health. . Soc. Sci. Med. 74:(11):181724
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  127. Stat. Can. 2022.. Canada is the first country to provide census data on transgender and non-binary people. . The Daily, April 27. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220427/dq220427b-eng.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Stern C, Rule NO. 2018.. Physical androgyny and categorization difficulty shape political conservatives’ attitudes toward transgender people. . Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 9:(1):2431
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  129. Stets JE, Serpe RT. 2016.. New Directions in Identity Theory and Research. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Stryker S. 2017.. Transgender History: The Roots of Today's Revolution. New York:: Seal. , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Stryker S. 1980.. Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version. Menlo Park, CA:: Benjamin/Cummings
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Sudai M, Borsa A, Ichikawa K, Shattuck-Heidorn H, Zhao H, Richardson SS. 2022.. Law, policy, biology, and sex: critical issues for researchers. . Science 376:(6595):8024
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  133. Suen LW, Lunn MR, Katuzny K, Finn S, Duncan L, et al. 2020.. What sexual and gender minority people want researchers to know about sexual orientation and gender identity questions: a qualitative study. . Arch. Sex. Behav. 49:(7):230118
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  134. Suhomlinova O, O'Shea SC, Boncori I. 2023.. Rethinking gender diversity: transgender and gender nonconforming people and gender as constellation. . Gend. Work Organ. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Sumerau JE, Holway GV. 2022.. Transgender possibilities and the cisgendering of family among cisgender women. . Symb. Interact. 45:(2):16788
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  136. Sumerau JE, Mathers LAB, Moon D. 2020.. Foreclosing fluidity at the intersection of gender and sexual normativities. . Symb. Interact. 43:(2):20534
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  137. Todd EV, Liu H, Muncaster S, Gemmell NJ. 2016.. Bending genders: the biology of natural sex change in fish. . Sex. Dev. 10:(5–6):22341
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  138. Tordoff DM, Morgan J, Dombrowski JC, Golden MR, Barbee LA. 2019.. Increased ascertainment of transgender and non-binary patients using a 2-step versus 1-step gender identity intake question in an STD clinic setting. . Sex. Transm. Dis. 46:(4):25459
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  139. Travers A. 2018.. The Trans Generation: How Trans Kids (and Their Parents) Are Creating a Gender Revolution. New York:: New York Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Valentine D. 2007.. Imagining Transgender: An Ethnography of a Category. Durham, NC:: Duke Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Vidal-Ortiz S. 2008.. Transgender and transsexual studies: sociology's influence and future steps. . Sociol. Compass 2:(2):43350
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  142. Wedesweiler M. 2023.. ABS apology over “hurtful” LGBTIQ+ census omissions hailed as “fantastic result. .” SBS News, Aug. 15. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/abs-apology-over-hurtful-lgbtiq-census-omissions-hailed-as-fantastic-result/p87my2iq7
    [Google Scholar]
  143. West C, Zimmerman DH. 1987.. Doing gender. . Gend. Soc. 1:(2):12551
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  144. Westbrook L. 2022.. Trans categories and the sex/gender/sexuality system: how transforming understandings of sex and gender can shift sexuality. . In Introducing the New Sexuality Studies, ed. NL Fischer, L Westbrook, S Seidman , pp. 2534. London:: Routledge. , 4th ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Westbrook L. 2023.. The matrix of violence: intersectionality and necropolitics in the murder of transgender people in the United States, 1990–2019. . Gend. Soc. 37:(3):41346
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  146. Westbrook L, Saperstein A. 2015.. New categories are not enough: rethinking the measurement of sex and gender in social surveys. . Gend. Soc. 29:(4):53460
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  147. Westbrook L, Schilt K. 2014.. Doing gender, determining gender: transgender people, gender panics, and the maintenance of the sex/gender/sexuality system. . Gend. Soc. 28:(1):3257
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  148. Wilson BD, Meyer IH. 2021.. Nonbinary LGBTQ adults in the United States. Rep. , Williams Inst., Los Angeles:. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/nonbinary-lgbtq-adults-us/
    [Google Scholar]
  149. Wipfler AJN. 2016.. Identity crisis: the limitations of expanding government recognition of gender identity and the possibility of genderless identity documents. . Harv. J. Law Gend. 39:(2):491554
    [Google Scholar]
  150. Worthen MGF. 2021.. Why can't you just pick one? The stigmatization of non-binary/genderqueer people by cis and trans men and women: an empirical test of norm-centered stigma theory. . Sex Roles 85:(5):34356
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  151. Yavorsky JE. 2016.. Cisgendered organizations: trans women and inequality in the workplace. . Sociol. Forum 31:(4):94869
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-soc-030222-035327
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error