Epistemic Injustice in Brain Studies of (Trans)Gender Identity

Researchers' sex/gender identity influences how sex/gender question is investigated in neuroscience: an example from an OHBM meeting

Gender inequality and diversity in STEM is a challenging field of research. Although the relation between the sex/gender of the researcher and the scientific research practices has been previously examined, less interest has been demonstrated towards the relation between sex/gender of the researcher and the way sex/gender as a variable is explored. Here, we examine, from a neurofeminist perspective, both questions: whether sex/gender identity is related to the examination of sex/gender as a variable and whether different approaches towards examining sex/gender are being used in different topics of study within neuroscience. Using the database of submitted posters to the Organization of Human Brain Mapping 2022 annual conference, we identified abstracts examining a sex/gender-related research question. Among these target abstracts, we identified four analytical categories, varying in their degree of content-related complexity: (1) sex/gender as a covariate, (2) sex/gender as a binary variable for the study of sex/gender differences, (3) sex/gender with additional biological information, and (4) sex/gender with additional social information. Statistical comparisons between sex/gender of researcher and the target abstract showed that the proportion of abstracts from Non-binary or Other first authors compared to both Women and Men was lower for all submitted abstracts than for the target abstracts; that more researchers with sex/gender-identity other than man implemented analytical category of sex/gender with additional social information; and, for instance, that research involving cognitive, affective, and behavioural neuroscience more frequently fit into the sex/gender with additional social information-category. Word cloud analysis confirmed the validity of the four exploratorily identified analytical categories. We conclude by discussing how raising awareness about contemporary neurofeminist approaches, including perspectives from the global south, is critical to neuroscientific and societal progress.

Sex, gender diversity, and brain structure in early adolescence

There remains little consensus about the relationship between sex and brain structure, particularly in early adolescence. Moreover, few pediatric neuroimaging studies have analyzed both sex and gender as variables of interest-many of which included small sample sizes and relied on binary definitions of gender. The current study examined gender diversity with a continuous felt-gender score and categorized sex based on X and Y allele frequency in a large sample of children ages 9-11 years old (N = 7195). Then, a statistical model-building approach was employed to determine whether gender diversity and sex independently or jointly relate to brain morphology, including subcortical volume, cortical thickness, gyrification, and white matter microstructure. Additional sensitivity analyses found that male versus female differences in gyrification and white matter were largely accounted for by total brain volume, rather than sex per se. The model with sex, but not gender diversity, was the best-fitting model in 60.1% of gray matter regions and 61.9% of white matter regions after adjusting for brain volume. The proportion of variance accounted for by sex was negligible to small in all cases. While models including felt-gender explained a greater amount of variance in a few regions, the felt-gender score alone was not a significant predictor on its own for any white or gray matter regions examined. Overall, these findings demonstrate that at ages 9-11 years old, sex accounts for a small proportion of variance in brain structure, while gender diversity is not directly associated with neurostructural diversity.

After the trans brain: a critique of the neurobiological accounts of embodied trans* identities

This paper critically analyses three main neurobiological hypotheses on trans* identities: the neurobiological theory about the origin of gender dysphoria, the neurodevelopmental cortical hypothesis, and the alternative hypothesis of self-referential thinking and body perception. In this study I focus then the attention on three elements: the issue of (de)pathologisation, the idea of the trans brain, and the aetiology of trans* identities. While the neurobiological theory about the origin of gender dysphoria and the neurodevelopmental cortical hypothesis claim the existence of the trans brain, each offering its own neurobiological depiction, the hypothesis of self-referential thinking and body perception doesn't postulate a distinctive neurobiological trait for all trans* people. I problematize both portrayals of the trans brain departing from the findings and conceptualizations of the paradigm shifting brain mosaicism. Unlike the hypothesis of self-referential thinking and body perception that keeps the question of causation open, both the neurobiological theory about the origin of gender dysphoria and the neurodevelopmental cortical hypothesis situate the origin of trans* identities in the neurobiological domain. I challenge the biological deterministic framework in which this aetiology is inscribed from a dynamic processual entanglement perspective. Finally, concerning the issue of (de)pathologisation of trans* identities, an evolution can be seen in each of the hypothesis and among them, from the least to the most depathologising. However, I question their complete departure from a pathologising framework.

Beyond the Binary: Gender Inclusivity in Schizophrenia Research

Schizophrenia is a severe neuropsychiatric disorder with significant differences in the incidence and symptomology between cisgender men and women. In recent years, considerably more attention has been on the inclusion of sex and gender in schizophrenia research. However, the majority of this research has failed to consider gender outside of the socially constructed binary of men and women. As a result, little is known about schizophrenia in transgender and gender-nonconforming populations. In this review, we present evidence showing that transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals have elevated risk of developing schizophrenia, and we discuss minority stress theory and other potential factors that may contribute to this risk. The need for inclusion of transgender and gender-nonconforming communities in schizophrenia research is emphasized, alongside a discussion on considerations and challenges associated with this type of research. Finally, we offer specific strategies to make research on schizophrenia, and research on other neuropsychiatric disorders, more inclusive of those populations that do not fall within the socially constructed gender binary. If we are to succeed in the development of more personalized therapeutic approaches for all, a better understanding of the variability of the human brain is needed.

Neurofeminism: Feminist critiques of research on sex/gender differences in the neurosciences

Over the last three decades, the human brain and its role in determining behavior have been receiving a growing amount of attention in academia as well as in society more generally. Neuroscientific explanations of human behavior or other phenomena are often especially appealing to lay people. Therefore, neuroscientific explanations that can affect individuals, groups, or social relations in general should be formulated in a careful and responsible way. One field in which especially feminist scholars request more caution is the neuroscientific examination of sex/gender differences. Feminist scholars have described various ways in which sexist bias might be present in neuroscientific research on sex/gender differences. In this context, they coined the term "neurosexism" to describe the entanglement between neuroscientific work and sexist ideology, and "neurofeminism" as a response to that. Here, we aim to give an overview over the contemporary neurofeminist literature. In the first part, common levels of analysis in the neurofeminist literature are presented and the research level is explored in more detail. In the second part, some common developments in more recent neurofeminist scholarship are discussed. For this, we review recent publications with the aim to provide neuroscientists with a solid understanding of neurofeminist criticism so that they may evaluate neuroscientific claims about on sex/gender differences from this critical perspective.

Let's Talk Gender: Ten Things Transgender and Nonbinary Youth Want All Researchers to Know

Youth view gender as a spectrum of experiences, not the cis-binary framework of girls/women versus boys/men. However, research has historically focused on cisgender people, without considering the rich experiences of transgender and non-binary people. Method. To address gaps in the inclusion of transgender and gender non-binary youth in research, a group of transgender and non-binary youth came together through a research-based youth engagement initiative to discuss what they wanted researchers to know about gender. Results. Youth propose ten guidelines and principles that they ask researchers to acknowledge, respect, and apply. These guidelines and principles focus on acknowledging and accepting diverse experiences situated on a gender spectrum, committing to learning more about gender, incorporating gender appropriately in their research initiatives, and engaging with transgender and non-binary youth in the research they conduct. Funders, research ethics boards, and publishers are also responsible for attending to gender. Conclusions. Researchers are called on to consider these guidelines and principles and to engage in dialogue around them in order to better capture the experiences of transgender and non-binary youth in the new evidence base as it emerges.

Reflections on Neurofeminism and Intersectionality Using Insights From Psychology

Intersectionality contends that sex/gender is constituted of and with other social categories, and that the social structures giving rise to inequality should be addressed in research. This is a powerful and important perspective from which to investigate the processes and consequences of social group memberships, one which has been overlooked by most neuroscientific research. In particular, neurofeminism, a field of critical neuroscience that challenges neuroscientific assumptions, methods and interpretations of data that reinforce sexism, has ignored intersectionality to date. In contrast, research in the field of psychology has been engaging with intersectionality for more than a decade. In reflecting on how intersectionality has advanced feminist research in psychology, this paper provides a critical analysis of potential novel research avenues for neurofeminism. We identify three main research themes guided by intersectionality. The first theme involves research centered on understanding the socio-structural causes of health inequalities experienced by individuals with intersecting marginalized social identities; the second concerns research addressing the psychological processing of social group memberships that underlies the enactment of systemic discriminatory practices; and the third theme comprises intersectionality research that aims to challenge psychological epistemology. Drawing parallels between the fields of psychology and neuroscience, we explore the potential benefits and risks of advancing an intersectionality-informed neurofeminism.

Challenging the binary: Gender/sex and the bio-logics of normalcy

BACKGROUND

We are witnessing renewed debates regarding definitions and boundaries of human gender/sex, where lines of genetics, gonadal hormones, and secondary sex characteristics are drawn to defend strict binary categorizations, with attendant implications for the acceptability and limits of gender identity and diversity.

AIMS

Many argue for the need to recognize the entanglement of gender/sex in humans and the myriad ways that gender experience becomes biology; translating this theory into practice in human biology research is essential. Biological anthropology is well poised to contribute to these societal conversations and debates. To do this effectively, a reconsideration of our own conceptions of gender/sex, gender identity, and sexuality is necessary.

METHODS

In this article, we discuss biological variation associated with gender/sex and propose ways forward to ensure we are engaging with gender/sex diversity. We base our analysis in the concept of "biological normalcy," which allows consideration of the relationships between statistical distributions and normative views. We address the problematic reliance on binary categories, the utilization of group means to represent typical biologies, and document ways in which binary norms reinforce stigma and inequality regarding gender/sex, gender identity, and sexuality.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We conclude with guidelines and methodological suggestions for how to engage gender/sex and gender identity in research. Our goal is to contribute a framework that all human biologists can use, not just those who work with gender or sexually diverse populations. We hope that in bringing this perspective to bear in human biology, that novel ideas and applications will emerge from within our own discipline.