I Am Not Anyone's Complement

CN: brief mention of transphobia

Sometimes I see people write things like “God made men and women in unique and complementary roles.”

This is usually in the context of some broader debate, about female pastors or submission, or same-sex marriage, so they write it like it's self-evident, as if that argument itself is a piece of evidence in their favor, and move on.

But I'm a scientist, and I like evidence. This statement isn't self-evident, and I'm pretty sure it's not even true.

None of these people ever seem willing to explain what they see as our “unique and complementary roles,” which is one hint that these roles don't really exist. When I look at the world around me, I don't see any evidence for them, either. I mostly see women and men doing the same kinds of things, with lots of overlap between those two genders. I see female and male pastors, doctors, scientists, farmers, police officers, teachers, childcare providers, stay-at-home parents, writers, investment bankers, photojournalists, and retail workers.

The same thing happens when I look at myself. What part of what I do is supposed to be my “unique and complementary” role? I am a scientist and a writer. I am someone's child, and someone's friend. I'm a student, a gardener, a bicyclist, and an environmentalist. None of this is gender dependent.

Is that phrase meant as a comment about household and domestic roles? I am the head of my household. I am also the only member. I do all the cooking, cleaning, and laundry. I also earn all the money, do all the snow shoveling, and all the maintenance that is within my ability. I assemble all the furniture and do all the construction projects. I am the one responsible for taking the car in for service as well as remembering doctor's appointments and birthdays. None of this is gender dependent.

Is this meant as a comment about personalities and hobbies? I am loud, aggressive, assertive, and forceful, if the situation calls for it. I lift weights to add muscle, not for toning. I can wield a weapon, and I can throw a punch. I am logical and reasonable. I am not particularly nurturing. I am not married, do not have children, and do not regret it. I have no problem asking someone out on a date. I do not do these things because I want to act like a stereotypical man. I do them because they reflect my natural personality. None of these things are gender dependent.

Is this meant as a comment about sexual preferences and roles? There is more to opposite-gender sex than the missionary position with the man on top. Women can, and do, act more dominant than their male partners in these relationships. Women can, and do, act equally as dominant as their male partners in these relationships. Women can, and do, have sex drives as high or higher than their male partners. The idea that women want love and men want sex is a lie. Women want sex too, and men want love. None of this is gender dependent.

Is this meant as a comment about genitalia? It's true that I cannot get an erection or father a child. But it's also true that I am no less able to get an erection or father a child than some cis* men. Similarly, cis men cannot menstruate or carry children in their uteruses, but they are no less able to carry children than some cis women. I have a further objection to this idea, though-- to say “God made men and women in unique and complementary roles” when you actually mean to opine that “God made men with penises and women with vaginas” is offensive. I don't mean that it offends my tender feminist sensibilities. I mean that it reduces people whom God created, in all their vast individuality, to their genitals. If our genitals were the most important things about us, why would we be so complex and so different from each other, every one of us?

There is little that a man can do that I am absolutely excluded from doing. There are things some men can do that I cannot do, like bench press 200 pounds, but I suspect most of the men I know also cannot do that. Some men can fix cars, or plumbing, or doors better than I can. So can some women. Most men and women are at about the same level of ineptness as I am. None of this is gender dependent.

More generally, there are very few lines between genders; there are very few traits, if any, that unambiguously determine if someone is male or female. Ability to carry a child? No. Ability to father a child? No. Intelligence, physical strength, personality, employment, hobbies? No. You could make an argument from biology, but I would advise you not to. Our biology is less relevant and more ambiguous than many people believe. For example, though many Christians like to think otherwise, trans* people do exist, and they are not “confused.” Though many Christians don't like to acknowledge it, because it complicates their thinking, intersex people do exist, and they are not “mistakes.” But even more generally than this-- God did not make us to be reduced to penises and vaginas. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes a penis is just a penis, not a determination of one's entire personality and life course.

I am not missing any pieces of myself that can only be supplied by a man. There is almost nothing I do that cannot be done by a man, and there is almost nothing most men do that I cannot also do. I could be replaced by an otherwise-identical man tomorrow and the world would hardly change at all. The things I do, the person I am, is not determined by my gender; I must conclude, therefore, that my role is not unique on the basis of my gender, and I am nobody's complement.

*if you're unfamiliar with the term, “cis,” short for cisgender, means “identifies as the gender they were assigned at birth.” It's in contrast with transgender, or “identifies as a different gender from the one they were assigned at birth.”