Element contents
Legal Categorization of 'Transgender'
An Analysis of Statutory Interpretation of 'Sex', 'Man', and 'Woman' in Transgender Jurisprudence
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 February 2024
Summary
This Element analyzes the foundational frame of legal reasoning when courts interpret the 'plain language' and 'ordinary meaning' of terms such as 'sex', 'man' and 'woman'. There is a rich and complicated line of cases on how to define these terms and how to legally categorize transgender people. When dealing with different legal issues, judges need to give a clear 'yes' or 'no', determinate answer to a legal question. Marginal categorizations could be problematic even for experts. It analyses nine decisions that relate to transgender people's workplace protection under Title VII in United States and the right to marry in United Kingdom and Hong Kong. It brings in a historical discussion of the development of interpretative practices of law and legal categorization of transgender individuals across past decades, drawing on the intricate relationship between time and statutory interpretation.
Keywords
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009221221Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 21 March 2024
References
Aprill, E. P. (1998). The law of the word: Dictionary shopping in the Supreme Court. Arizona State Law Journal, 30, 277–336.Google Scholar
Atkin, A. (2013). Peirce’s theory of signs. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition).Google Scholar
Bannet, E. T. (1997). The Marriage Act of 1753: ‘a most cruel law for the fair sex’. Eighteenth Century Studies, 30(3), 233–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyer, D., Weiss, J. T. & Wilchins, R. (2014). New Title VII and EEOC Rulings Protect Transgender Employees. http://transgenderlawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/TitleVII-Report-Final012414.pdf.Google Scholar
Bolin, A. (1994). Transcending and transgendering: Male-to-female transsexuals, dichotomy and diversity. In Herdt, G. (Ed.), Third sex, third gender: Beyond sexual dimorphism in culture and history (pp. 447–485). Zone Books.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1987). The force of law: Toward a sociology of the juridical field. The Hastings Law Journal, 38(5), 814–853.Google Scholar
Broadus, K. W. (2006). The evolution of employment discrimination protections for transgender people. In Currah, P., Juang, R. M. & Minter, S. P. (Eds.), Transgender rights (pp. 93–101). University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M. (1999) “Why be normal?” Language and identity practices in a community of Nerd girls. Language in Society, 28(2), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex.” Routledge. Butler, J. (1998). Subjects of sex/gender/desire. In Kemp, S. & Squires, J. (Eds.), Feminisms (pp. 278–285). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (1999). Revisiting bodies and pleasures. Theory, Culture & Society, 16(2), 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calder, J. (2021). Whose indexical field is it? The role of community epistemology in indexing social meaning. Proceedings of the 20th Meeting of the Texas Linguistics Society, March 5–6, pp. 39–55. http://tls.ling.utexas.edu/2021tls/TLS_2021_Proceedings.pdf.Google Scholar
Cheung, K. (2016). The ‘bathroom hurdle’: A transgender woman’s fight for legal recognition and safe spaces. Hong Kong Free Press. https://hongkongfp.com/2016/05/29/the-bathroom-hurdle-a-transgender-womans-fight-for-legal-recognition-and-safe-spaces/1/18.Google Scholar
Chow, Y. (2013, July, 13). Hong Kong must do right by its transgender minority. South China Morning Post. www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1280403/hong-kong-must-do-right-its-transgender-minority.Google Scholar
Cunningham, C. D., Levi, J. N., Green, G. M. & Kaplant, J. P. (1993). Plain meaning and hard cases. The Yale Law Journal, 103(6), 1561–1625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currah, P. & Minterm, S. (2000). Unprincipled exclusions: The struggle to achieve judicial and legislative equality for transgender people. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 7(1), 37–66.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (1997). Taking the inside out: Sex and gender in the legal subject. In Naffine, N. & Owens, R. J. (Eds.), Sexing the subject of law (pp. 25–46). LBC Information Services.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). Thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (Massumi, B., Trans.). Athlone.Google Scholar
D’Onofrio, Annette. (2021). Sociolinguistic signs as cognitive representations. In Hall-Lew, L., Moore, E. & Podesva, R. (Eds.), Social meaning in linguistic variation: Theorizing the third wave (pp. 153–175). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerton, R. (2006). Finding a voice, fighting for rights: The emergence of the transgender movement in Hong Kong. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 7(2), 243–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erni, J. N. (2013). Legitimating transphobia: The legal disavowal of transgender rights in prison. Cultural Studies, 27(1), 136–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evan, J. (1988). Statutory interpretation: Problems of communication. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fallon, R. H. Jr (2014). Three symmetries between textualist and purposivist theories of statutory interpretation – and the irreducible roles of values and judgment within both. Cornell Law Review, 99(4), 685–734.Google Scholar
Feldman, S. M. (1996). The politics of postmodern jurisprudence. Michigan Law Review, 95(1), 166–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, A. (1993). Modernity and authenticity: A study of the social and ethical thought ofJean-Jacques Rousseau. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Fish, S. (1987). Still wrong after all these years. Law and Philosophy, 6(3), 401–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, S. (1989). Doing what comes naturally: Change, rhetoric, and the practice of theory in literary and legal studies. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: An introduction volume 1. (Hurley, R., Trans.). Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Gal, S. & Irvine, J. T. (2019). Signs of difference: Language and ideology in social life. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodrich, P. (1996). Gender and contract. In Bottomley, A. (Ed.), Feminist perspectives on The foundational subjects of law (pp. 17–46). Cavendish Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Green, R. (1985). Spelling “relief” for transsexuals: Employment discrimination and the criteria of sex. Yale Law & Policy Review, 4(1), 125–140.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1994). The concept of law (2nd ed., first published in 1961). Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hill-Collins, P. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.Google Scholar
Honkasalo, J. (2020). In the shadow of eugenics: Transgender sterilization legislation and the struggle for self-determination. In Gupta, K., Steinberg, D. L., Moon, I., & Pearce, R. (Eds.), The emergence of trans: Cultures, politics and everyday lives (pp. 17–31). Routledge.Google Scholar
Hooley, J. (1994). What is this thing called Gender “Dysphoria”? Tranys with attitude, 6–11, The Newsletter of the Transgender Liberation Coalition.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. (2011). Objectification and transgender jurisprudence: The dictionary as quasi-statute. Hong Kong Law Journal, 41, 27–47.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. (2014a). Word, meaning and legal interpretation: An introductory guide. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutton, C. (2014b). The tangle of colonial modernity: Hong Kong as a distinct linguistic and conceptual space within the global common law. Law Text Culture, 8, 221–248.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. (2017). Transgender jurisprudence: Legal sex and ordinary language. In Hazenberg, E. & Meyerhoff, M. (Eds.), Representing Trans: Linguistic, Legal and Everyday Perspectives (pp. 55–76). Victoria University Press.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. (2009). Language, meaning and the law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. (2019a). Integrationism and the self: Reflections on the legal personhood of animals. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, L. (2022). ‘I’m a boy, can’t you see that?’: Dialogic embodiment and the construction of agency in trans youth discourse. Language in Society, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404522000252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutton, C. (2019b). The tyranny of ordinary meaning: Corbett v Corbett and legal sex. Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, B. W. (2016). Becoming the intelligible Other: Speaking intersex bodies against the grain. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(4), 359–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, M. (2003). Research and discussion paper: Perceptions of MtF transgendered persons and their sexual partners in Hong Kong. http://web.hku.hk/~sjwinter/TransgenderASIA/paperperceptions_of_mtf.htm.Google Scholar
Konnelly, L. (2021). Nuance and normativity in trans linguistic research. Journal of Language and Sexuality, 10(1), 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Z. (2020, November 13). 香港罕有跨性別武術家許瑋楓專訪: ⌜我男變女, 喜歡女 生, 一點不柔弱⌟ [Interview with Transgender Martial Artist Hui Wai Fung in Hong Kong: “I transitioned from male to female, I am in love women, and I’m not at all weak”]. BBC News. www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news- 54553312.Google Scholar
Manning, J. F. (2006). What divides textualists from purposivists? Columbia Law Review, 106(1), 70–111.Google Scholar
Mendoza-Denton, N. (1999). Fighting words: Latina girls, gangs, and language attitudes. In Galindo, D. L. & Gonzales, M. D. (Eds.), Speaking Chicana: Voice, power, and identity (pp. 39–56). University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Nakassis, C. (2018). Indexicality’s ambivalent ground. Signs and Society, 6(1), 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ormrod, R. (1972). The medico-legal aspects of sex determination. The Medico-Legal Journal, 40(3), 18–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosch, E. (1999). Principles of categorization. In Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. (Eds.), Concepts: Core readings (pp. 189–206). Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Royal Anthropological Institute (RAI). (1951). Notes and queries on anthropology (6th ed.). Royal Anthropological Institute.Google Scholar
Rynd, A. J. (1991). Dictionaries and the interpretation of words: A summary of difficulties. Alberta Law Review, 28, 712–717.Google Scholar
Scalia, A. (1997). A matter for interpretation: Federal courts and the law. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schauer, F. (1989). [Review of the book The nature of the common law by A. E. Melvin]. Is the common law law? California Law Review, 77(2), 455–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1985). Language and the culture of gender: At the intersection of structure, usage and ideology. In Mertz, E. & Parmentier, R. (Eds.), Semiotic mediation: Sociocultural and psychological perspectives (pp. 219–259). Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M. (2003). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language and Communication, 23(3–4), 193–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. (2000). The sovereign state v Foucault: Law and disciplinary power. The Sociological Review, 48(2), 283–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.00216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, J. (2009). In pursuit of the gene: From Darwin to DNA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sharpe, A. (1996). Judicial uses of transsexuality: A site for political contestation. AlternativeL. J., 21, 153–172.Google Scholar
Sharpe, A. (2002). Transgender jurisprudence: Dysphoric bodies of law. Cavendish Pub.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solan, L. (1995). Judicial decisions and linguistic analysis: Is there a linguist in the court?. Washington University Law Quarterly, 73, 1069–80.Google Scholar
Stryker, S. (2006). (De)subjugated knowledges. In Stryker, S. & Whittle, S. (Eds.), The Transgender studies reader (pp. 1–18). Routledge.Google Scholar
Suen, Y. T., Chan, R. C.H. & Wong, E. M. Y. (2021). Excluded lives: The largest scale survey on the social and legal marginalisation of transgender people in Hong Kong so far. [Report]. Sexualities Research Programme, Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self. The making of the modern identity. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tao, K. W. Y. (2016). Exploring the sources of authority over the word meaning in transgender jurisprudence. Marginalised Bodies (Re)Imagining the Law, Special Issue for International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 29, 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tao, K. W. Y. (2022). Claiming transgender identity: Contextualising the linguistic tension among trans women in Hong Kong. Gender and Language (special issue).Google Scholar
Transgender Equality Hong Kong. (2021). Transgender people in the workplace. http://www.tehk.org.hk/.Google Scholar
Vade, D. (2004). Expanding gender and expanding the law: Toward a social and legal conceptualization of gender that is more inclusive of transgender people. Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, 11, 253–313.Google Scholar
Weiss, J. T. (2008) Transgender identity, textualism, and the Supreme Court: What is the “plain meaning” of “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?. Temple Political &Civil Rights Law Review. 18(2), 573–650.Google Scholar
Werbach, K. (1994). Looking it up: Dictionaries and statutory interpretation. Harvard Law Review, 107, 1437–53.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Philosophical investigations (Anscombe, G.E.M., Trans.). Blackwell.Google Scholar
Zander, M. (2004). The law-making process (6th ed.). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimman, L. (2014). The discursive construction of sex: Remaking and reclaiming the gendered body in talk about genitals among trans men. In Zimman, L., Davis, J. L., & Raclaw, J. (Eds.), Queer excursions: Rethinking binaries in language, gender, and sexuality (pp. 13–34). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar