How Our Bodies Are Relationally Determined

We live in a time in which some societal movements and ideologies are attempting to evacuate the sexed¹ human body of meaning.² Transgender ideology sees the sexed body as trivial, so much so that it claims a body of one sex can be “changed” into a body of the opposite sex in order to match the “feeling” that one has been “trapped in the wrong body.”³ Transhumanist ideology seeks to transcend the limits of human nature by “perfecting” or “augmenting” the human condition, including the human body.⁴ Both of these ideologies are dualistic, driving a wedge between the human body and the human soul. They try to convince us that our sexed bodies don’t really matter and don’t have any intrinsic meaning. They proclaim that “the real me” is somewhere inside my body, disconnected from my physicality. Therefore, these ideologies (which are really false religions) try to make us believe that our bodies are perfectly manipulable, like pieces of clay; and like clay, our bodies can thereby be molded into almost any shape we can imagine without affecting us in any meaningful way. We are being persuaded, subtly and not-so-subtly, that the sexed human body has no objective meaning and, even more, that the sexed body is inconsequential regarding how we relate to each other and how we form human relationships.

Catholics should immediately balk at these ideological claims. We know that the sexed human body has dignity, not only because we are made, body and soul, male and female, in the image and likeness of God (see Gen 1:27), but also because God showed us how meaningful and important the human body is when he assumed a full and complete human nature, body and soul, as a man, revealing what it means to be a human person. Christ, the New Adam, shows us what it means to be a man, and Mary, the New Eve, reveals the fullness of what it means to be a woman. Yet, when Catholics try to talk about the meaning of the human body, and the errors of current body-and-sex-dismissing ideologies, with people who do not share our faith, we often find ourselves at a loss regarding how we should engage in these discussions. If we cite the creation accounts in the book of Genesis, or if we refer to Jesus revealing the goodness of the body, our interlocutors may likely respond with something like, “Your arguments are based in your religion, so I don’t accept them.” It’s at this point that Catholics need to be able to rely upon right reason to explain the objective nature of the human body and how the sexed human body is relationally determined, meaning that our bodies relate to other bodies differently based up on our sex.

Often times, when Catholics discuss the distinctive significance of men and women, we resort to arguments based on “gender roles.” For example, a man is a provider and a protector who is action-oriented, while a woman is a nurturer and an empath who is more in tune with people’s emotions and seeks to build relationships. While these characterizations might be generally true in the aggregate, our discussion about the importance of the sexed human body and how it is relationally determined cannot be focused on “gender roles.” If this is our focus, our interlocutor can rightly point out that gender roles vary from one era to another and from culture to culture. They might also note that some men have more stereotypical female traits, while some women have more stereotypical male traits. Instead, the focus of the discussion should be on explaining how the sexed body is essential to our personhood and our identities regardless of “gender roles,” or personal dispositions, or personality traits.

We can begin this discussion by pointing out that human bodies are unique phenomena in this world because no other bodies on this earth show evidence of rationality, complex reasoning, or creativity. We are, as human persons, an intimate unity of body and rational soul. This is precisely what makes us human persons, and not animals (bodies without rational souls) or angelic persons (rational spirits without bodies). Therefore, we cannot separate the body and the soul, focusing on one to the exclusion of the other, in our understanding of the human person.

In addition, we also need to point out that male human bodies and female human bodies are distinct but related phenomena. We understand the distinctness of male and female bodies when we encounter another human person. Fully encountering another human person is not possible through some disembodied telepathic encounter, but only through the body. We only truly know each other through our bodily presence to each other. This is a truth that is undeniable. We know intuitively that no amount of long-distance communication or interaction on social media can substitute for encountering the other embodied person, nor can we arrive at an accurate understanding of others without encountering them bodily.

When we encounter another human person through the body, we are aware of one of two realities. Either this person is embodied in the same manner as I am, sharing the same sex, or this person is embodied differently than I am as a member of the other sex. Further, we are aware that the sexed human body is either male or female. When we encounter someone whose body does not immediately reveal the person as either male or female, we feel confused because we are not sure how we should relate to that person nor even how we should address that person. Thus, we are intuitively and reflexively aware that our maleness or femaleness is important for how we relate to each other. Further, we are intuitively aware that we relate to male bodies and female bodies differently. We are aware that these different modes of embodiment determine how we form relationships. When we encounter a human body that is of the other sex, we know that we relate to that embodied person differently than we relate to embodied persons with whom we share the same sex. Ultimately, we are aware of whether we are interacting with someone who is embodied in the same way that we are or someone who is not.

When we encounter a human body that is differently sexed than our own, we are aware that there is not only a difference between our two bodies, but we also become aware that we share our embodied experiences differently with those who are of our same sex and those who are of the other sex. We understand that embodied-ness as a woman is different from embodied-ness as a man. We even realize that it is difficult, if not impossible, to describe what it “feels” like to be a man or a woman. In fact, men can explain their unique embodied-ness only in relation to women, and women can explain their unique embodied-ness only in relation to men. If there were only male bodies in the world, these bodies would be unintelligible regarding their structure. If there were only female bodies in the world, these bodies would also be unintelligible regarding their structure. It is only because the other sex exists that we can make sense of our own sex.

Part of this intuitive understanding of ourselves and others that we gain through our bodies is an awareness of how we can bond with that person. As we develop and age, we become aware that persons of the opposite sex are persons with whom we can bond in a particular way. We become aware that there is a complementarity between our bodies and the bodies of the opposite sex that does not exist between us and the bodies of others who are our same sex. More precisely, we become aware that a procreative relationship is a potential reality with a person of the opposite sex, and that this same type of relationship is not possible with a person of our same sex.⁵ Male and female bodies evidence that men and women are of the same species (homo sapiens, or “wise” or “intelligent” man), meaning that they are biological organisms that possess similar characteristics and are capable of interbreeding.

In fact, it is in recognizing the capacity of the human body, male and female together, for procreation that the fundamental difference between bodily relationships is made evident. We realize the role that each embodied person plays in the act of procreation, and we realize that these roles are not interchangeable. We realize that each of us has only one-half of a complete reproductive system, and that we stand in need of a person of the opposite sex to contribute the other half for procreation to occur. We can call the other sex the “opposite” sex inasmuch as this body is “opposite” mine in the role that it plays in continuing our species. We realize that however “opposite” the other sex may be, the embodiment of persons of that sex are complementary, not contradictory, to our embodiment. We know intuitively that these are not culturally contingent or socially manufactured “gender roles,” but rather these are species-specific roles that are dictated by our embodied-ness as men or women.

Realizing the non-interchangability, yet complementarity, of the male and female bodies in the act of procreation allows us to understand that all human relationships depend on how we are embodied. We understand that our embodiment, which is always sexed, determines how we relate to others, and therefore that our human bodies are relationally determined bodies. We realize that there is something distinct about male embodiment and female embodiment, and that our relationships flow from our embodiment. A man relates differently to other men than he does to women. A woman relates differently to other women than she does to men. This holds true for all human relationships, which can only be experienced as embodied persons.

Human language is meant to bespeak reality.⁶ Therefore, in the way we speak we need to differentiate between male embodied-ness and female embodied-ness. In the language we use we cannot act like these two realities are the same, because they are not. This is why speaking of “men” and “women,” “he” and “she,” is important. “Non-gendered” names or pronouns do not bespeak accurately the reality of the embodied-person, and they actually discount the importance of our embodied-ness. The distinctness of how male human bodies and female human bodies relate to each other needs to be designated by accurate language that pertains to all of our relationships, especially familial relationships. Only a man can be a son, a brother, a husband, and a father; and only a woman can be a daughter, a sister, a wife, and a mother. Parents relate to their children differently, based upon each child’s embodiment, and each child relates to each of his/her parents differently based on the parent’s embodiment as well. A man’s relationship with his sisters is different from his relationship with his brothers. A woman’s relationship with her brothers is different from her relationship with her sisters. Men have a unique ability to be husbands, while women have a unique ability to be wives, based upon their bodily complementarity. These relationships are not socially constructed or socially conditioned, but are based on a person’s embodied-ness, and the words we use to refer to these distinct relationships evidence the reality that male embodied-ness is different from female embodied-ness. We need to differentiate between the two modes of human embodiment by using distinct terms like “son” and “daughter,” “brother” and “sister,” “husband” and “wife,” “father” and “mother.” To use other identifiers or pronouns would not bespeak the distinct realities we encounter in embodied persons and how these bodies relate to each other.

In the end, it is because the human person is a body-soul composite (CCC 364–365; ST, I, q. 76) that we are not truly human without our bodies.⁷ The human body is relationally determined by its sex, which reveals to us our fundamental identity and how we relate to others. Our sexuality then is not just about external appearances, because our sexed bodies determine how we exist in the world, how we love, and how we form bonds of love and communion (CCC 2332). Feelings cannot change the way in which our bodies are structured for love and communion. Procedures that make a person’s body look like a body of the opposite sex do not change who that person is and how that person can relate to others. It is impossible to change our sexed human bodies into opposite sexed bodies because this attempt only results in mutilated human bodies. These now disfigured bodies cannot relate to others in the way the opposite sex (that they are trying to mimic) can. Fundamentally, as Ryan Anderson points out in his book When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment, our sex, and therefore how we relate to each other, is determined by how our bodies are structured for procreation.⁸ It is not possible for a man to change his body to look like a woman, or for a woman to change her body to look like a man, and thereafter be able to play the noninterchangeable role of the opposite sex in procreation. If surgical procedures are involved, what results is a sterile and deformed human body. It is also not possible to transcend our maleness or our femaleness by augmenting or enhancing the body. Such augmentation or enhancement is also a form of mutilation or disfigurement of the body.⁹

Self-made meaning is no meaning at all.¹⁰ Any attempt to construct one’s one meaning by mutilating or augmenting the human body will not satisfy. Instead, we need to acknowledge and accept who we are in our embodied-ness and live in accord with this fundamental aspect of human existence in the world. To do otherwise is to embark on an attempt to continually re-create ourselves or to provide ourselves with a false sense of meaning, purpose, and even salvation. This is a never-ending proposal that will leave us exhausted, confused, discouraged, and unfulfilled. The body is not a play-thing, and it resists being tampered with. Moreover, the sexed human body is a good! The body is not an obstacle to happiness. It is not a burden or a hindrance to human fulfillment — physical, emotional, psychological, or otherwise. Only living in accord with our given mode of embodiment as men or women will lead to fulfillment, because that is living in accord with the reality of who we are.

As Catholic Christians we understand that our bodies are gifts from a God who loves us more than we love ourselves and who wants our happiness and our fulfillment more that we do! We realize the fact that our bodies are sexed is also a gift from God and that our sexuality permeates the entirety of our persons in the unity of body and soul (CCC 2332). Furthermore, we realize that we receive our identity from God, and we know as Christians that our fundamental identity is not just that we are beloved creatures of God, but that being incorporated into the Body of Christ through baptism, each of us is God’s beloved son or daughter.¹¹ Finally, we realize that our sexed bodies will be resurrected and that the fullness of the meaning of masculinity and femininity will be revealed to us when we exist as sons and daughters of Our Heavenly Father through the Son in union with the Holy Spirit for all eternity.

After we clear away intellectual barriers to understanding the importance of the sexed human body according to reasoned arguments, this is the beautiful truth that we should ultimately want everyone to receive about themselves — each of us is invited to be a beloved son or daughter of God! Only by responding to this invitation and receiving this truth in the depth of our being will we experience true fulfillment, true happiness, true peace, and abiding joy as embodied persons in relation with other embodied persons, now and in eternity.