Language about gender/sex should be used intentionally and flexibly.

Abstract

In their paper, 'Conceptualizing transgender experiences in psychology: Do we have a 'true' gender?' Jackson and Bussey (British Journal of Psychology, 115, 723) critique the idea of having a 'true' gender and propose that the term 'transgender experience' may be more appropriate than 'transgender identity'. In this commentary, I reflect on the usefulness of the terms transgender identity and transgender experience and argue that both hold value and can contribute to a more nuanced discussion of gender/sex. I use the discussion of these two terms as a springboard to make a broader point: As researchers, we should use language about gender/sex flexibly and intentionally. As psychologists, we are trained to use clear operationalizations for the constructs we study, yet it is often unclear whether authors refer to biological sex, gender identity, social perception, or socialization when they speak of 'women' and 'men'. I encourage researchers to be more mindful in their language use and to engage with the nuanced terms that gender scholars (including Jackson and Bussey) have put forward when discussing gender/sex - both in the context of transgender identities and experiences and when discussing cisgender identities and experiences.