What do you think?
Rate this book
256 pages, Paperback
Published August 31, 2021
Stockton clearly knows her subject, but is more interested in rhetoric and pursuing an intersectional narrative than in things like clarity, precision, and rigor. The result is mix of interesting factual information (whose veracity I have no particular reason to doubt), mildly obscurantist prose, some trivial claims annoyingly presented as though they should be surprising (e.g., "Money is in our gender!" which is just Stockton's shorthand for bloody obvious things like "Medical transition isn't free"*), some claims that should be taken with a healthy dose of salt, and some claims that should be chucked straight in the wastebasket. I often had this image in mind while reading:
Most egregiously bad claim, which is also arguably the closest thing the book has to a central thesis:
Have we ever had, then, a two-sex system, “man� and “woman,� in this country’s history? Since this nation’s founding, we have consciously, often legally, had at least a six-sex system (with more sexes beyond the thirteen colonies): white woman, white man, Black woman, Black man, Native woman, Native man . . . This becomes more stunning the more one considers it, raising the question: who is my “opposite,� my “opposite sex�? There are no opposites with six or more sexes.
I have absolutely no idea how Stockton is defining 'sex' here. Certainly, this isn't supported by the only definition she explicitly gives early in the book, which, to her credit, is a perfectly sensible definition grounded in developmental biology. She hints (here and in an earlier passage) at defining 'sex' as anything that serves as a basis for legal discrimination, but that seems utterly bizarre and unmotivated, makes the focus on race alone arbitrary (what about age, marital status, etc.?), and doesn't fit with the "consciously, often legally" bit anyway. "But what about intersectionality?" you might ask. Well, as Stockton herself says, the central claim of intersectionality is that the experience of being female and black, for example, is not simply the sum of the experience of being female and and the experience of being black. Intersectionality, in other words, is committed to viewing race and sex as distinct categories that intersect with non-additive results. It can recognize Stockton's six categories, but definitely not as sexes. There is no argument anywhere in the book for this galaxy-brained attempt to assimilate race into sex.
I'm not going to say you definitely shouldn't read this book - like I said, it contains some interesting information and ideas, and it wasn't so bad I stopped reading. But I would say that you must have a functioning bullshit detector and also tolerance for that "six-sex system" level of bullshit for it to be at all worth reading. And there's got to be some better book on the subject out there.
* Worth noting that this comes up in the context of the US military refusing to include transition in the medical benefits it provides, supposedly because that would be too expensive. Oddly, Stockton just takes the excuse at face value, rather than considering what the cost would actually be and putting it in the context of the military's frankly absurd budget.