Introduction
Human sexuality is a complex subject that involves biological, social, cultural, and religious factors. Historically, human sexuality had been viewed from the perspective of human reproduction. However, as the science of sociology advances, and people learn more about how social and cultural environments shape our behavior, beliefs, and attitudes, more possibilities emerge in viewing human sexuality from varying perspectives. Science and technology today allow people to express sexuality according to how they perceive themselves. For instance, it is possible to switch gender, and this possibility divided the terms sex and gender into two separate concepts. This paper will discuss a news article which tells the story of Gavin Grimm, who is a transgender person discriminated against based on his sexuality. The exploration of the story will provide an opportunity to discuss human sexuality within the context of contemporary culture and sociology.
Summary of What Happened
Gavin Grimm, in 2016, was a senior high school student in Gloucester County School when he decided to become a transgender person. After several surgeries that reconstructed his chest and hormone therapy, he obtained a birth certificate that declared him a male (Crump, 2020). Before continuing with his education, he also attained a court order, which stated that the birth certificate is valid and that Grimm is legally a male person (Crump, 2020). Despite these documents, the school board decided to restrict Gavin from using the boys’ school bathroom (Crump, 2020). Grimm decided to sue the school board, and the judge ruled in favor of the transgender student (Crump, 2020). The court said the school board had a discriminatory policy that was “against transgender students based on their gender nonconformity” (Crump, 2020, para. 5). The school Board, however, appealed, saying Grimm had not undergone sex reassignment surgery, which technically made him a female (Crump, 2020). The hearing has not ended and is currently taking place remotely.
Through the Prism of Social Construct of Sexuality
Traditionally, sex and gender had been interchangeable terms because essential perspectives on human sexuality were based on biological factors. In other words, when a human is born, he or she has a gender that is given biologically (Lehmiller, 2017). However, if human sexuality is viewed through the prism of social construction, then gender and sex become two separate concepts (Simon, 2017). Sex, in this context, is defined by biological characteristics that are given when people are born. On the other hand, gender encompasses social and cultural variations linked to having particular sex (Simon, 2017). When exploring Crump’s (2020) article within the context of the mentioned ideas, it is possible to say that Grimm, despite having female sex upon birth, felt she had a male gender. Contemporary texts on sociology draw a definite line between the terms sex and gender. Scientists also emphasize that biologically-given sex may not correspond to associated gender. Therefore, the situation of Grimm is not extraordinary – he was a female by birth but may have associated himself with a masculine culture when he grew up.
Because contemporary sociologists believe that human sexuality is socially constructed, then it is necessary to be aware of the notion of gender identity. Grimm’s case is explicitly associated with this concept because his self-conception about his gender led him to become a transgender person. However, as the school board stated, Grimm has not undergone the required surgeries to switch sex. Therefore, Grimm is only transgender and not a transsexual person. Although sociologists firmly believe in the theory of social construction of sexuality, the majority of people do not share this opinion, which sometimes leads to discrimination and other issues.
Different Perspectives
Discrimination against transgender people is common, but not all issues that involve transgender individuals can be labeled as segregation. Sometimes, problems are complex and need detailed examination and analysis (Lehmiller, 2017). The case of Gavin Grimm is two-fold – on the one hand, it is tempting to dismiss the event as an act of discrimination. However, the judge that rule in favor of Grimm may have missed significant points. First, it is necessary to define how school bathrooms are separated. In other words, it is crucial to establish whether the bathrooms are separated based on sex or gender.
The school board claimed that the separation is done based on sex. In this case, the school board did not act discriminatorily – individuals that have female sex use girls’ bathroom, while students of male sex use boys’ bathroom. The way students identify themselves does not influence this policy. One may identify himself as a girl but have male genitalia (Lehmiller, 2017). This individual will have to use the boys’ bathroom because the separation is based on sex. To be able to use the boys’ bathroom, Grimm will have to undergo surgery to become a transsexual person. Another possible resolution is the amendment of the school policy.
Impact of Involved Parties
The case of Grimm involves three separate parties interacting with each other. The first one is Gavin himself, the second party is the judge, and the third group is the school board. In the beginning, there is an impression that, while the court is aiming to resolve the issue, the school board is attempting to perpetuate it. However, it should be mentioned that the school board reported that they supported Grimm’s self-conception of gender. In other words, they used pronouns that Gavin desired and asked for. They did not contradict the notion of the social construction of sexuality.
Furthermore, the school also differentiates between the concepts of sex and gender, as proven by their explanation of their decision. The court, on the other hand, might be perpetuating the issue with school policies regarding transgender individuals. It is not sufficient to label each case that involves a transgender individual as an act of discrimination. Instead, the government should develop a consistent framework schools can use to avoid such issues from happening again in the future. Therefore, it may not be possible to implement the court’s current order because bathroom facilities are often designed with biological sex in mind, not gender identity.
Conclusion
Contemporary sociology has made significant contributions to the present understanding of human sexuality. Despite these advancements, many acts of discrimination take place throughout the world. At first sight, the case of Gavin Grimm may seem like segregation, but it is merely a result of deficiencies in current policies and varying perceptions regarding sex and gender. The government needs to develop a consistent policy framework that will benefit from the ideas of the social construction of human sexuality. This paper provided a summary of the news article about Gavin Grimm and discussed it within the context of sociology.
References
Crump, J. (2020).‘Stigmatising and humiliating’: Transgender man sues Virginia school board for banning him from male bathrooms. Independent.
Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. John Wiley & Sons.
Simon, W. (2017). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Routledge.