Epistemological Injustice

Research on transgender is a scientific phenomenon that has been relatively less explored in the 21st century. The human condition lacks awareness of its own existence, including why humans exist, who created them (other than attributing it to a Creator), and why the universe exists.

However, research on the transgender experience is hindered by the prevailing gender binary conventions that humans have been conditioned to. In terms of epistemological justice, any observed phenomenon should include not only standard cases but also edge cases to define a comprehensive object of observation.

Note: Enhance the description of the biological sex of human beings using a multidisciplinary approach which also covers different facets of the human condition including neurology, endocrine, and metabolism. If biological science and conventions haven't developed, then please develop them to include transsexual conditions in the biological framework. Understandably, legal systems with a patriarchal framework may have contributed to epistemological injustice in the study of 'human biology'. It can pressure scientific discourse into accepting narrow versions of reality and thus propagating it.

In terms of knowledge discovery, thereby reducing biological sex to an acute and narrow descriptor that does not qualify to be able to hold edge cases in the descriptors, e.g. biological sex descriptors dependent on what scientific literature calls reproductive organs. Excluding the science of cognitive senses that the human condition possesses amounts to inaccurate conventions to begin with, for public health care services for all.

Several factors contribute to this epistemological injustice such as:

1. A small percentage of people are able to come out and identify as transgender. Among them, an even smaller population across the world consists of educated and financially successful individuals with resources to invest in documenting and publishing healthcare-related research for developing tools, resources, and conventions for gender studies.

2. Societal stigmatization plays a role where most participants adhere strictly to a gender binary mindset instead of embracing the nuanced existence of transgender individuals in various platforms and forums within human society. This can be seen in how schools or learning environments reinforce binary gender norms.

3. Due to societal stigma surrounding human sexuality and misconceptions about the relationship between sexuality and gender cognition, discrimination against transgender minorities occurs under the influence of majority needs.

4. Lack of consensus on generally acceptable scientific standards further complicates matters due to misinformation and myths clouding the scientific basis.

5. Many people who do not regularly interact with transgender experiences find it comfortable not studying this phenomenon since it does not directly impact their daily lives.

6. For those whose brains have been trained within a gender binary framework, there is fear that acknowledging transgender conditions threatens their existential harmony as it challenges their neural setup which only understands life through a gender binary lens.

These factors contribute to an educational understanding of why research on transgender experiences faces challenges rooted in societal biases and limited perspectives based on traditional notions of gender identity.

References:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02806-3/fulltext