The Problem With the Gender Binary and Why We Should Move to Three Dimensional Modeling of Gender Identities

Breanna Rawlins (any/all) 

We need a definition of gender that better encompasses how society views gender identity and all that it entails. Experts in gender studies have tried to create this definition, but have failed because our perception of gender is always evolving. This constant evolution has led to the concept of gender remaining largely undefined. Frankly, the experts can’t keep up with the shifts in perspective. I would like to propose both a more accurate way to model gender, and a way that we, as a collective, can do so more effectively. ​

The prevalent gender model is a binary one, from female to male, and it very occasionally includes the space in between the two. The primary issue with this model is that it no longer accurately reflects how society views gender. This is especially true in young people. Gender is modernly perceived as a spectrum- and it should be modeled in a way that accurately portrays this. For this reason, I think that our definition of gender should move towards a three-dimensional model. I’m proposing that we use the gender cube. This model will allow people to understand gender and how it affects life and research across all academic disciplines, while also acting as a starting point to further understand gender identity itself and how it evolves.

Spectrum gender models have been previously suggested, with mixed results. In 2004, a four-component model of gender was suggested. Those components were biological sex, gender identity, gender-role expression, and sexual orientation. These four components may sound familiar to anyone who has ever seen Killermann’s genderbread person model. The problem that arises from models like the genderbread person is that the individual components still exist on a binary scale from “man” to “woman.” As gender is morphing from a stable setting to something more dynamic, this binary scale is no longer all-inclusive.

Gender is often used as a categorical distinction worth studying in scientific research. The differences in “men” and “women” have been studied extensively in just about every field that you can think of. However, due to the evolution of the perception of gender,  these studies cannot be entirely accurate if they are utilizing the gender binary as their measure of reference for categorical gender differences. Many scholars have stated how important it is to update the definition of gender and the way it is used in scientific studies, but few have suggested how to go about updating them. This is where we come in. I think we should cut out the middleman and take the experts out of the equation. Since gender is a social construct, it should be defined by society!

The experts don’t really have a reason to fault this method. The development of a better way to model gender, one that utilizes a cube in three-dimensional space, would allow for several advances in the academic community. This model would be able to more efficiently describe gender differences and allow scientists to track them and how they affect different projects across all scientific fields of study.  A three-dimensional model also allows for more in-depth study of gender itself and could lead to new ways of understanding the concept, and new ways of thinking about gender identity. Everyone wins!

My plan, which I’m affectionately calling “crowdsourcing the definition of gender,” would take place in three phases. 

 PHASE ONE
In phase one, a series of questions will be developed and distributed to volunteers.  The important part of this phase will be collecting as much data as possible, from as many people as possible. During this stage of modeling, the consensus will be reached by asking society at large. This consensus will be used to determine the initial values of the regions inside of the gender cube. In phase one, there will also be questions that allow participants to self-assign their gender identity. These self-assigned identities will be a crucial part of the final model, as they will determine how the inner regions of the cube are defined.

It will be important that the design of the survey questions allows for our points inside the gender cube to exist at all possible locations, and not just as discrete points. However, I think this will be easily accounted for within the algorithm itself. Alternatively, we could use sliding scales for volunteers to answer the questions on. 

PHASE TWO 
In phase two, the questions will be finalized and used to create the algorithm for the cube model. The previously self-assigned gender identities will be utilized in the algorithm to create regions for each identity. 

Starting in phase two, the questions will remain unchanged but still allow for users to rank their relevance. This will allow tracking of trends in what society considers part of a gender identity. Questions that frame gender through multiple lenses will be asked, and the ranking of such questions will allow for society to define which of these lenses are integral parts of a gender identity.

PHASE THREE
Finally, the gender cube will be released to the public and published via the internet. The algorithm will be continuously updated as new data comes in. This adaptability will allow for long-term tracking of the trends surrounding gender identity and how it is perceived by the public. 

Now, as with many great things, there will be challenges with this method. Most obvious being this type of research will lend itself to being incredibly self-selecting and significant efforts will need to be made to prevent that. This is so important because the gender cube should also include representation for the people who have never given their own gender a thought, and these people are very unlikely to input data into the gender cube algorithm.

Another possible, and likely unavoidable, challenge stems from the fact that once the model is published and available to the public online: there is no way to guarantee that the people interacting with the model are doing so in good faith. As gender identity has become a divisive topic, the publication of the model will allow for people to put nonsensical, or false data into the model, and it will be included in the algorithm. Basically, the gender cube will only be as accurate as the whims of internet trolls allow. 

The good news is that with the ongoing nature of this project, it will be able to be utilized to define gender as that definition changes over time. This will allow the project to continue to be useful as it evolves and will hopefully allow researchers access to a current societal definition of gender at any given time. 

FOR THOSE INTERESTED, A SIDE QUEST INTO THE MATH
My mathematical suggestion for the gender cube is to have ordered triples generated from the surveys’ inputs. The ordered triples will represent the traditional x, y, and z axes in three-dimensional real space. The x-axis will represent whether the subject’s gender identity matches the biological sex they were assigned at birth, and it will range from the same as at birth to different from at birth. This will also be affected if somebody’s gender identity includes both binary genders. Meanwhile, the y-axis will represent how many genders the subject identifies as, ranging from no gender to multiple genders. Finally, the z-axis will represent how frequently the respondent's gender identity changes, ranging from never to constantly in flux. Of course, these axes could also change entirely based on the rankings of importance given by the participants!

​