Math Proofs, Gender Proofs

Abstract

In this paper I argue that predominant gendering practices support a proof ideal similar to the one operative in mathematics, contributing to the erasure and assimilation of countercultural practices. After fleshing out the analogy, I argue it can be productive: in gender as in mathematics, there is room for rethinking what we mean by—and want from—proof. The proposal is to think of gender in terms of an agent’s gender grounds , i.e., the set of first-person gender proofs accepted or rejected by said agent. This framework avoids common worries about deflationary and essentialized notions of gender identity, provides many of the usual epistemic benefits of proof, is compatible with first-person authority over one’s gender, and fruitfully complements an ameliorative semantic pluralism for gender terms.