“Trans gender rights are human rights”. An often heard tautological statement, but is every request that the trans community makes a ‘human right’? I'm going to examine a summary of the rights that transgendered organizations are asking for and see if these fit within the definition of human rights vs exceptions and/or desires of the community. I will be taking an American view on this, as my knowledge of non-American countries is lacking. Feel free to educate me on different views on human rights for different countries to see if I have missed anything.

First, a reference for sex and gender according to modern day gender theory.

Sex – the objective biological expression of the reproductive role of a species. Males and females. Example: Males are statistically taller on average than females.

Gender – a subjective social expectation of non-biological expressed behavior based on one’s sex. Example: Males should wear pants, females should wear dresses.

Gender identity – A person’s explicit decision to act in accordance with a gender of a particular sex. If a person acts in alignment with the gender of their own sex at the exclusion of the other, this is called cis gender identity. If they act in alignment with the opposite sex to the exclusion of their own, this is called trans gender identity. This is cultural behavior.

Sex identity – An objective classification based on bodily reality, not subjective cultural behavior. This cannot be chosen. A cis sexual is someone who accepts their sex identity. A trans sexual is someone who does not accept their sexual identity and works to change their physical body to be as close as possible to the opposite sex.

To be clear, sex identity and gender identity are distinct. A trans sexual identity may not be trans gendered, and a trans gendered identity may not be trans sexual.


Onto rights.

Human Rights - Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status.

We can specify this further with personal and group rights.

Personal rights - The idea that a human being should be free from law for certain behaviors and actions as a human being. These include freedom of speech, the right to privacy, and the right to defend oneself if attacked. Personal rights are considered the most fundamental, as they are what we consider innate to being human. Any attempt to control that is an attempt to control the fundamental nature of a humans thoughts, feelings, or bodily life.

Group Rights– Also known as collective rights, are rights held by a group rather than an individual. “Trans rights” is short for trans gender rights. “Human rights” include everyone without exclusion.

The types of rights that trans gender people are asking for are ‘gender identity’ rights. Cis gender rights concern ‘rights that a member of a particular sex identity has to act as the gender identity associated with that sex identity’ Trans gender rights concern ‘rights that a sex identity has to act as the gender identity associated with the opposite sex’.

It is important that we contrast this with trans sexual rights, and note that trans gender rights are not the same this to avoid confusion. Cis sexual rights concern the right of the sexual identity of one’s sex. Trans sexual rights concern the right to the sexual identity of the opposite of one’s own sex.

For the claim “Trans rights are human rights” to be true, the request of these rights must be equal in abstract to what any other human should be able to claim as a right. Further, such right claims must not conflict with other resolved conflicts within human rights. For example, “The right to protest vs the rights or private property.” People have the right to protest, but not protest by destroying private property such as setting houses on fire or robbing people. Trans rights do not demand this, but if they claimed, “We want the right to protest and set buildings on fire”, this would not be a human right.

For a reference of claims to trans gender rights, I went here https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/trans-rights-101-definition-examples-significance/#:~:text=The%20transgender%20rights%20movement%20calls,right%20to%20life%20and%20safety . as a reference. Let me know in the comments if you have a better reference. I’ll summarize them as follows:

1. The right to change identity documents that are used to mark sex identity, to gender identity. For example, changing a driver’s license from male to female based on gender, not sex.

2. The right to enter bathrooms and sex divided spaces based on gender identity instead of sex identity

3. The right to being able to dress cross gender and have pronouns be used to reference gender identity instead of sex identity in public areas like schools, and private businesses like work.

4. Healthcare that services a person’s desire to align their body with their gender identity instead of sex identity without barriers. To further not be refused normal medical treatment because a person is transgendered, and to be referred to by their gender identity and not sex identity.

5. The right to life and safety.


I’ll start with the claim which is obviously a human right. ‘The right to life and safety’. Is this a right that transgender individuals do not have? In some parts of the world, this may not be the case. In America? Yes. As far as I know of there is no law which permits violence against transgender individuals. Definitely a human right and I don’t think anyone can reasonably deny this.

Going up the list we have #4, which I’ll call “Equitable health care”. I do not see how asking for the same healthcare rights and options as everyone else isn’t a right. Is it a right to demand that doctors provide medicine and surgery to alter your body to match your chosen gender identity?

First, I am aware that health care is often not considered a personal or group right, and could be open to debate. To avoid losing focus, we will assume that the transgender community is not asking for anything more than the equal opportunities in access and ability to pay for healthcare that other people have in the country they reside in. The right to equal opportunity of service in what is offered in one’s country is a human right, so this also fits.

However, “The right to healthcare that align’s their body with their gender identity without barriers” needs closer examination. First, this is a trans sexual right request, not a trans gender right. A trans gender person does not necessarily want to alter their body or need to have their sex identity changed. Despite this clearly being a trans sexual rights request, its on the list so it will be examined. Looking at similar cases for equal opportunity, do people have access to medicine to alter their bodies because they desire to look different? We see in the West that cosmetic procedures are done all the time, though on the person’s dime. As such, I believe it is a right for people to be able to, of their own free will and money, alter their body as a trans sexual. Bodily autonomy is a human right.

Should this be funded by insurance or the medical system? If other cosmetic surgeries are included, then yes. If not, then no.

I will note this is not addressing the treatment of gender dysphoria. The trans argument that I am aware of today is that the desire to transition is a perfectly normal and acceptable desire of a person and does not require one to have gender dysphoria. However, if it is considered by some parties that gender dysphoria is a mental health issue that needs treatment, then I would argue people with gender dysphoria have a right to treatment of this mental health issue like any other mental health issue. Does that mean transition is always the solution? No. That solution should be determined through careful analysis of a health care professional that causes the patient the least harm backed by objective science, not the desires or demands of the individual. Scientifically backed treatment which places barriers is responsible medical care, and the right to not unnecessarily harm another individual would trump a rights request of ‘no medical barries”. Every medical treatment has barriers, so this is simply equal opportunity of service.

If the request to get trans sexual treatment is cosmetic, that seems like the right of the individual to pay for if they choose to. If a trans sexual assignment is considered the correct medical procedure to treat gender dysphoria, then it should be the right of the patient to have this. But there is no right of the patient to push a doctor to diagnose gender dysphoria, or lower any barriers to get this treatment easier. That should only be determined by doctors and valid science.

Should a person be refused other general medical treatment because they are trans gendered? Absolutely not. This is just a basic equal opportunity of services right.


Points 1, 2, and 3 are where I believe issues start to arise. I can sum it up as follows: “Transgender people want the right to not only have legally enforced gender recognition, but that this gender recognition gives them the same right and privileges of the sex identity of the gender they enact” Here is where I have a difficult time seeing how these requests are human rights.

First, sex is not gender. Thus, without careful explanation as to why gender enactment should equate to sex differentiated right and privileges, this seems an unreasonable claim that should only be considered in trans sexual cases. Perhaps in the case of a trans sexual individual, this is a right. But in the case of a trans gender individual, there is no logical reason to have gender identity overrule sex identity and deny the rights accorded to sex identity.

Second, enforcing people to refer to you by the gender you take on instead of your sex is forced speech. If a person decides to use pronouns as gender descriptors, that is their choice. But if someone decides to use pronouns as sex descriptors, this is also their choice. Mandating pronoun usage by a person’s individual subjective gender would be in contradiction of the recognized human right to free speech.

Third, gender is a subjective category that can vary from individual and groups. As such it can rarely be objectively captured in law. If a person does not subjectively recognize another person’s personal and subjective gender identity, how could such a law force a person to recognize it? Making a law that enforces a subjective viewpoint that may change from person to person is not only irresponsible, it opens enforcement based on subjective viewpoints which is a violation of the human right to equal treatment by the law. Enforcing a subjective opinion on another person would further be a violation of a person’s right to think for themselves. Thus, forced pronoun usage is a violation of the human rights.

Fourth, gender does not shape sex, sex shapes gender. Without sex, gender would not exist. Without gender, sex would still exist. Any law which would prioritize the legitimacy of a consequent over the base which leads to its consequent is illogical. If A -> B B cannot lead to ~A. If gender is a consequence of sex, taking on the gender of the other sex does not mean your own sex has changed, and by consequent, should not give one access to laws and spaces based on objective sex identities.


WIth this, we can examine the specific points that are claimed as human rights and evaluate them.

1. There is no right to prioritize the legal enforcement of gender identity over sex for identification purposes. The subjective can and never should be forced over the objective. Forcing someone to have a subjective viewpoint is an attempt to control another individual because of a difference of opinion, not matters of fact. Further, gender rights are not sex rights, therefore they hold no sway over sex based rights.

2. There is no right to prioritize the legal enforcement of gender identity in regards to sex separated spaces if those sex separated spaces are sex rights. If a space is separated due to biological differences, and not merely non-biological cultural expectations, there is no valid reason why a subjective cultural expectation should hold any sway in decisions of objective biological reality. So places like bathrooms, sports where sex differences matter, and places that serve different biological needs do not need to allow people who do not fit these biological requirements into their places based on a person’s subjective gender.

3. This one is the most interesting and might have some sway to it. The pronoun enforcement of gender identity over sex identity is of course not a right because of the points mentioned above. But enforcement of dress policy IS a rare case of an attempt to legally enforce gender. The idea that only a female can wear a dress is a purely cultural expectation, and not based on biology.

Generally dress code is used to convey professionalism and avoid casual or revealing clothing that would distract at work. If a male comes in with a professional dress that is not revealing or provacative, it seems the male has not done anything objectively wrong, merely something culturally discouraged.

In legal matters where gender is explicitly written as enforced, I could see an argument that this is a violation of people’s rights to modest presentation, at least in public places. In matters of business law, there is a question as to whether they get to shape the business gender. As gender is subjective, would a group’s subjective view of gender have a legal right over an individual’s subjective group of gender? Should gender even be recognized as something legal at that point, or is this something culture should handle without government interference? This one I think deserves debate, but beyond the scope of this original post.

As such, arguing that the right to wear clothing at a business subjectively associated with the opposite sex, might indeed be a right worth fighting for. As for private life, an individual absolutely has the right to act in any gendered manner they wish.


So, are trans gender rights human rights? Some of them are. Some of them are not. Feel free to disagree in the comments.