Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective
Transgender genocide
Characterization of discrimination against trans people From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Remove ads
Transgender genocide or trans genocide is a term used by some scholars and activists to describe genocide targeted towards transgender people as well as describe an elevated level of systematic discrimination and violence against transgender people.
The term is related to the common meaning as well as the legal concept of genocide, which the Genocide Convention describes as an intentional effort to completely or partially destroy a group based on its nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion.[2] Some legal scholars and transgender rights activists have argued this definition should be expanded to include transgender persons.[3]
Remove ads
Scholarship
Summarize
Perspective
International law
The acts that are constituent to the crime of genocide in the Genocide Convention, when perpetrated against transgender, non-binary, and intersex people as groups, are not viewed legally as genocide, but as crimes against humanity.[4][5] Some scholars have argued that the definition of genocide should be applied to transgender persons, or expanded to cover transgender persons, because they are victims of institutional discrimination, persecution, and violence.[6] Caitlin Biddolph in analyzing the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia highlights how queer people have been repeatedly ignored as victim groups in the Genocide Convention due to being perceived as non-reproductive groups as opposed to the groups listed in the convention.[7]
In a 2008 academic article in hate studies, Jeremy Kidd and Tarynn Witten argue that the abuse and violence against transgender people would qualify as genocide as defined by the Genocide Convention, if the definition was expanded to include gender identity and sexual orientation.[8] In line with the convention, they argue that transphobic discrimination and violence are not random or atomized, but rather come from the intent "to eradicate a group of people who violate a widely held and popularly reinforced norm of binary gender with a connection to heteronormative sexuality."[9] They say that this motive of "eradication/annihilation" is systemic, pandemic, institutionalized (e.g., through the penal system and military), and spread widely through media and film.[9] They say that transgender people face an increased risk of abuse and violence throughout their lives and that, despite being targeted in ways that fit some criteria of the Genocide Convention, they do not have access to the same legal protections as other groups.[10] This is supported by L. June Bloch who describes how many of the bills and laws enacted by US legislatures in recent years fit the detailed genocidal acts of the convention, but as transgender people do not constitute one of the protected groups of the convention the attempts to cause "serious bodily or mental harm and inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the destruction of a group" is not classed as legally genocidal.[11] Shannon Fyfe states that while the actions of US governments and legislatures do not meet the legal charge of genocide, due to transgender people not being one of the protected classes, this is a failure of the law, and that the actions of various state legislatures shows genocidal intent against the transgender community.[12]
The Rome Statute, a 1998 treaty that established the International Criminal Court and codified investigations into genocide, outlines a definition of gender-based persecution. This definition, however, only "refers to the two sexes, male and female."[13] Valerie Oosterveld attributed this definition to conservative political pressure from states like Azerbaijan, the Holy See, and some nongovernmental organizations in the lead-up to the treaty's adoption.[14] While this definition has not yet been litigated at the ICC, it is likely that it would be used to exclude transgender people from international legal protections.[13]
In a 2014 article, Brian Kritz assessed the ability of the International Criminal Court to protect and promote transgender rights, arguing that existing law should be explicitly extended to transgender people.[15] He noted that the lack of existing protections for transgender people under international law was in-and-of-itself "a violation of the basic human rights of the global transgender and intersex populations."[16]
Scholars have made similar arguments regarding the legal definition of crimes against humanity.[17][18]
In the past, international courts have interpreted genocidal sexual violence to be a problem of cisgender women alone, often classifying the same systematic sexual violence against all members, who are not cisgender women, as crimes against humanity, as was done by the United Nations International Fact-Finding Mission for Myanmar. David Eichert argues that this interpretation "discounts the suffering of victims and needlessly weakens attempts to identify, prevent, and punish the crime of genocide" and pleads for the field to adopt a broader understanding of genocidal sexual violence, which is not limited to cisgender women alone.[19] While the International Criminal Court has not yet adjudicated on sexual violence in genocide, in Prosecutor v Ntaganda it accepted that cisgender men could be victims of sexual violence.[4] Later the Office of the Prosecutor's 2023 Policy on Gender-Based Crimes connected gender-based violence to genocide, and included "LGBTQI+ people" in its understanding of "gender-based violence".[4]
Genocide studies
Genocide studies research that focuses exclusively on transgender people is rare, with Lily Nellans noting that "the unique and specific experiences of queer people during genocide remain absent from this type of research, limiting our understanding of genocidal processes".[20] Henry Theriault has argued that discrimination against transgender people is "largely tolerated" despite the fact that identical laws targeting other marginalized people would spark severe public outcry.[21]
Alexander Laban Hinton, an anthropologist focused on genocide, has criticized what he characterizes as "the prioritization of certain protected groups and not others" in established legal definitions of genocide, specifically noting transgender people as a group that could never be targeted by genocide in the status quo.[22] Haley Marie Brown describes violence against transgender women as a "life force atrocity" that is justified using genocidal logic, describing how such violence is often coupled with attempts to eliminate any evidence of a person's transness through complete destruction of their bodies.[23]
Leah Owen, a lecturer at Swansea University, has argued that anti-transgender ideologies rely on "discourses of 'toxification'", drawing on a paper by Rhiannon Neilsen[24] that proposed "toxification" as a more precise alternative to the traditional fourth stage of genocide, dehumanization.[25] Owen compares Nielsen's concept of toxification, in which groups of people are compared to pathogens or threats and their removal from society is necessitated, to statements from Popes Benedict XVI and Francis, Janice Raymond, Abigail Shrier, and Helen Joyce,[26] arguing that regardless of agreement on other issues, anti-transgender activists consistently seek to reduce or eliminate transgender people's public presence. Nevertheless, she refrains from claiming that the modern anti-gender movement is inciting genocide yet, arguing that it lacks a securitizing urge to mobilize against transgender people.[27]
Biomedical and genetic ethics
Some surveys have indicated that there is a concern among transgender individuals that trans-associated genetic research may lead to eugenics. A study conducted in 2021 found that many of those surveyed believe that genetic research could end up with a kind of "eugenics" that would, in effect, "eliminate" transgender people, while some respondents feared that, in more transphobic areas, trans-associated research would lead to "medical genocide".[28][non-primary source needed] This concern has been supported by scholars who highlight the link between the medical care transgender people can access and receive and eugenics movements historically and contemporaneously.[29] In 2022, a study found that almost of half of individuals interviewed feared the "weeding out" of LGBTQ people while a quarter explicitly referred to "cleansing or eugenics".[30] Lawyer Agripino Kennedy shows the link of biological essentialist language in recent US laws and bills targeting transgender people to eugenic ideologies, and the history of eugenic laws targeting the queer community, and transgender people specifically in the US and Germany.[31]
Sterilization that is forced upon transgender people, in order to obtain legal recognition, is characterized by political theorist Anna Carastathis as a violation of reproductive rights, eugenic, and genocidal.[32] On the extent of this practice among European counties, she cites a 2013 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.[33][34] Recognizing that transgender persons are not covered by legal definitions of genocide, she argues "that trans people are systematically written out of legal existence" both through the compulsory sterilization and their exclusion from the Genocide Convention.[35] In contradistinction to Carastathis, political scientist Jemima Repo argues that compulsory sterilization does give transgender people a political existence, but at the expense of a capacity to extend kinship (i.e., family) into the future. As a result, Repo says that reproduction, at least in Finland, becomes a mode of transgender resistance in the face of sterilization demands.[36]
Other fields
Transgender genocide has been examined by scholars of queer studies, hate studies, and other fields.[8][37] Katerina Standish building on the idea of gendercide, uses the term transicide for gendercidal violence committed against those for "their nonconformity to the sex-gender binary".[38] She further argues how as femicide is theorized as a form of genocidal violence, the same should be the case in understanding transicide.[39] Caitlin Biddolph highlights that queer victims of crimes such as genocide have previously chosen silence in legal proceedings where they were likely to face discrimination and punishment for their queer identities.[40]
Remove ads
Background
Summarize
Perspective
Throughout history, many transgender persons have experienced systematic persecution, including mass incarceration, forceful changes of gender, and social death. Historians have described as genocidal selected actions against transgender people, including colonialist and Nazi activities that occurred before the term genocide was used in international law.[41][42] Adam Jones wrote in his 2017 book Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction that "In recent years, as gay rights have become gradually more accepted and respected, the burden of atrocity has increasingly targeted transgender women and male transvestites."[41]
Nazi Germany
Matthew Waites examines the absence of sexuality, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity as group categories in the Genocide Convention. He argues that those targeted by the Nazis because of their non-conforming gender identities should be recognized as a genocide unique from the Holocaust.[37] According to the Museum of Jewish Heritage, the Nazi German government "brutally targeted the trans community, deporting many trans people to concentration camps and wiping out vibrant community structures."[43] This area of research is underdeveloped and the number of transgender victims is unknown.[44][45] Heather Panter, writing in the book Genocide and Victimology, noted that the number of transgender people targeted by the Nazis was likely lower than the number of gay people targeted.[46]
Matt Fuller and Leah Owen argued that while Nazi anti-queer ideology was "incoherent and erratic", they targeted transgender people with extermination and memoricide.[47] They cited the looting and burning of the books at the Institute for Sexology as an example of this memoricide. [48] The Institute for Sexology published journals on trans and queer issues and pioneered early gender-affirming surgeries.[49] The institute also hosted the D'Eon Organization, which was founded in 1930 to advocate trans rights.[50] Fuller and Owen cited Bauer (2017) to explain a psychological element to this, stating "the mere presence of the bodies and desires of trans people was a challenge, threat, and source of anxiety to many Nazis, meaning they – or the physical archive that reflected their identity – had to be destroyed."[51]
The Nazis provided varied justifications for their targeting of queer people and that they often conflated trans issues with homosexuality.[52] In a document outlining the division of labor in the Reich office for the Combatting of Homosexuality and Abortion, "transvesites" were listed as a responsibility of the organization, separately from "all manifestations of homosexuality" and "combating of all enemies of positive population growth", suggesting trans identity was conceived of as a distinct issue and threat by the Nazis. As part of the 1933 mass incarceration of gay men in Fuhlsbüttel concentration camp, Hamburg city administration told the chief of police to "pay particular attention to transvestites and to deliver them to the concentration camps if necessary."[53]
Fuller and Owen further argued that transmasculine and transfeminine individuals faced inconsistent treatment. Masculine presentations from those assigned female at birth were stigmatized: the National Socialist Women's League published a book in 1934 which warned gender ambiguity represented "signs of degeneration emanating from an alien race ... inimical to reproduction and for this reason damaging to the Volk. Healthy races do not artificially blur sexual differences" and Himmler complained in 1937 about the "nauseat[ing] catastrophe that was masculinizing ['young girls and women'] so that, over time, the difference between the sexes, the polarity, is blurred. From there, the path to homosexuality is not too far off." There is an inconsistency in individual accounts of transmasculine people.[53] One was forcibly detransitioned, another was detained in Lichtenburg concentration and released 10 months later with a permit from the Gestapo to wear men's clothing, and another was allowed to dress as a man without a permit following a medical examination and a promise that they had never engaged in homosexual relations.[53]
In 2022, the Regional Court of Cologne ruled that denying that trans people were targeted by the Nazis qualifies as "a denial of Nazi crimes".[54]
On 27 January 2023, the German government dedicated its annual Holocaust memorial commemoration to LGBTQ victims of the Holocaust. This marked the first time the German government had granted official recognition to transgender people as victims of the Holocaust.[55][56] In a speech given at the commemoration, German Bundestag President Bärbel Bas stated "For our remembrance culture, it's important that we tell the stories of all victims of persecution, that we make their injustice visible, that we recognize their suffering."[55] Transgender people have also been recognized or commemorated as victims of the Holocaust by the Human Rights Campaign,[57] Amnesty International,[58] the European Parliament,[59] the Museum of Jewish Heritage,[43] and the United Nations.[60]
Indigenous peoples of the Americas
The violence perpetrated against Indigenous peoples of the Americas who did not conform to European sexual and gender norms due to this nonconformity has been described as genocide.[61][62] Thais Torres‐Castro and Amalia Morales‐Villena highlight this in the colonization of Puerto Rico and the genocide of indigenous people who did not follow the gender binary.[63] Ongoing violence against Two-spirit and LGBTQ Indigenous peoples of Canada has also been a focus of study and analysis within the genocidal[64] occurrence of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women.[65]
Indonesia
In the mid-1960s in South Sulawesi, an Islamic militia (Ansor) and an Islamic purification movement (led by Kahar Muzakkar) stigmatized, persecuted, and murdered many among the bissu, a transgender social group. The bissu were seen as objectionable under Islam and, in 1966, an Islamic "Operation Repent" targeted nonconforming Indonesian genders. Bissu rituals were violently suppressed, bissu heads were shorn, and bissu were ordered to conform to male gender roles or die. To demonstrate this coercive threat, a bissu leader was decapitated.[66][67][68]
Brazil
Jones describes Brazil's treatment of transgender people as "unquestionably gendercidal", noting that at least one trans person was reported killed every 27 hours in 2014.[41] Brazil has had the highest amount of transgender murder victims in the world since 2009, with the average lifespan of a transgender Brazilian being less than half that of a cisgender Brazilian.[69][70] Activists in Brazil have also described the targeting of transgender people, particularly Afro-Brazilian transgender women, as a genocide.[70][71][72] The neologism transgenerocídio (Portuguese: transgendercide) is a term used in Brazil to classify transgender genocide.[73][74]
Russia
On July 24, 2023, President Putin signed into law a bill banning gender-affirming care in Russia.[75][76][77] Russian outlet Meduza described the new law as "genocide" and stating that "it will make [society] even more afraid and hateful of trans people."[78][79] Former municipal politician Vitaliy Bovar said in response to the passing of the law, and increasing anti-gay laws in previous years that "homophobic and transphobic laws are genocidal practices, an attempt to destroy human diversity in Russia."[80]
United Kingdom
Following the For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers Supreme Court ruling and subsequent interim guidance published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), on June 30 2025, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention issued a "Red Flag Alert" for transgender and intersex rights in the United Kingdom. The Institute stated that "If the [EHRC] guidance does become law, it would make transition impossible in the UK. Life as a transitioned person would become unbearable", and that the ruling by the Supreme Court and the guidance by the EHRC means that "All of the actions described above fit neatly into the 9th Pattern of Genocide".[81][82]
United States
Sue E. Spivey and Christine Robinson have argued that the ex-gay movement, which encourages transgender as well as other LGBTQ people to renounce their identities, advocates social death and therefore could meet some legal definitions of genocide.[83] Spivey and Robinson argued that "by waging a culture war using hate propaganda and misusing scientific research to gain public legitimacy, the movement seeks to deploy state powers and the medical profession to perpetrate genocidal acts on its behalf."[84]
Transgender journalist Emily St. James has described some US laws as meeting criteria mentioned in the United Nations definition of genocide, including laws banning gender-affirming care ("causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part"), and those allowing child protective services to pursue child abuse claims against the parents of children receiving gender-affirming care and remove said children ("forcibly transferring children of the group to another group").[85][86] From 2020 to 2024, over 250 bills were introduced in state legislatures that sought to either limit or ban gender-affirming care for transgender people,[87] with 26 states passing bills by 2025,[88] and bills being introduced at the federal level from 2023 seeking the same goals.[89] Further bills have been introduced restricting transgender people's ability to exist openly in society, with 15 states banning transgender people from sex-segregated spaces.[90][91] These laws have led to transgender people becoming "internally displaced" as they flee "genocidal politics".[92]
Transgender healthcare bans in the US have been condemned by medical organizations. A report published by Yale School of Medicine in response to bans on gender-affirming care in Alabama and Texas argued that the bans were no more ethical than a prohibition on healthcare for any other life-threatening medical condition.[93] The president of World Professional Association of Transgender Health wrote an opinion article in the New York Times stating her view that these laws constituted an effort to "rid the world of transgender people."[94] Similar sentiments were expressed in a WPATH public communique: "Anti-transgender health care legislation is not about protections for children but about eliminating transgender persons on a micro and macro scale."[95] L. June Bloch argues that such bills and laws that "will lead to a statistically predictable increase in suicidality among" transgender people meets the criteria of "inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the destruction of a group" in the Genocide Convention,[96] with district judge Robert L. Hinkle agreeing with expert testimony that such bans cause "needless suffering" and will lead to increase in the "risk of suicide".[97]
In a 2015 interview with CBC Radio, Terryn Witten, an expert on transgender violence, said that if just looking at the United States, she would not use the term genocide and instead refer to it as "rampant murder".[98] Witten does argue that when taking a global perspective, there is a transgender genocide ongoing.[98] In the same interview, hate crime expert Bernie Farber of the Canadian Jewish Congress contested the use of the term "transgender genocide" to describe the situation internationally or in the US or Canada due to the state offering protections to trans people in contrast with the state taking a policy of elimination. He described it as being insensitive to victims of recognized genocides, such as the Holocaust, because it does not meet the legal test, despite the "terrible crimes against the community." He argued that it could be applicable on a national level in certain locations, such as in Russia or Uganda. [99]
Statements made by American right-wing media figures regarding trans people have been criticized as genocidal. During a speech at the 2023 Conservative Political Action Conference, political commentator Michael Knowles stated "There can be no middle way in dealing with transgenderism. It is all or nothing", continuing: "For the good of society, and especially for the good of the poor people who have fallen victim to this confusion, transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely".[100] The previous week, Knowles had claimed on his online show presented by the Daily Wire that a genocide against trans people is impossible because they are "not a legitimate category of being."[101] His statements were described as "blatantly genocidal",[102] and were criticized by the Human Rights Campaign[103] as well as the Lemkin Institute which noted "The speed of Knowles' response suggests that he may be concerned that his words put him in violation of laws against incitement and may make him accountable for future hate crimes and mass atrocities against trans people."[104] Matt Walsh, another Daily Wire commentator and a key figure of the anti-gender movement in the US, garnered similar criticism in December 2024 after stating "We are not gonna rest until every child is protected, until trans ideology is entirely erased from the earth" at a protest against gender-affirming care for transgender youth.[105] Far-right US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene was faced with backlash from Minnesota Democratic Party Chairman Ken Martin and other public figures in February of 2022 when she threatened that her husband would beat a trans camp counselor "into the ground" during an appearance on conspiracy theorist Alex Jones's Infowars program, further stating such action was necessary to "stand up against" trans people while claiming their presence around children constitutes child grooming.[106] Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative organization Turning Point USA, was accused of encouraging mass violence against LGBTQ people in February 2023 when he stated in regards to trans women participating in women's sports that "Someone should have took care of it the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and '60s" during a conversation with anti-trans activist Riley Gaines on his Real America's Voice show, also claiming that "the decline of American men" and a decrease in testosterone levels has caused trans identity to become more common.[107]
Since the start of the second Donald Trump presidency, a variety of executive orders and legislation have been implemented targeting transgender people,[108] with such orders and legislation being described as "arguably genocidal".[109] In March 2025, the Lemkin Institute put out a "Red Flag Alert for Genocide" of transgender individuals, in particular citing conservative commentator Michael Knowles's comments of eradicating "transgenderism". They further stated that the Trump Administration's actions, such as identity denial, are part of a "genocidal process against the transgender community".[104]
Remove ads
Activism
Trans and other queer activists have used the term "transgender genocide" to oppose discrimination and violence against transgender people, especially when seen as a global phenomenon.[110] In 2013, it was reported that, "...a coalition of NGOs from South America and Europe started the 'Stop Trans Genocide' campaign."[111] For example, the term was used by a Latin American trans activist who sought asylum in Germany.[112] In 2018, Planned Parenthood of New York City president Laura McQuade said in a speech that a Trump administration proposal to change federal recognition of transgender persons would lead to genocide.[113]
See also
References
Further reading
Wikiwand - on
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Remove ads